Manitoba Hansard — 2 December 1977 (Sitting 11, 31st Legislature, 1st Session)

31-1-11

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

ISSN 0542-5492 First Session - Thirty-First Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Vol .. XXV No. 11 26 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Harry E. Graham Speaker 2:30 p.m. Friday, December 2, 1977 Printed by P. N. Crosbie - Queens Printer for the Province of Manitoba

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY of MANITOBA Friday, December 2, 1977 Time: 2:30 p.m . OPENING PRAYER by Mr . Speaker MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham (Birtle-Russell): I would like t o direct the attention of the honour able mem bers to the galler y on my le ft where we have 11 students of Grade 5 standing from the William Osler Schoo l. These stude nts are under the direct ion of Mrs. Mcintyre. This school is located in the constituency of the Honour able Memb er tor River Heigh ts, Min ister withou t Portfolio. On behalf of all the memb ers present we welcome you here this afte rnoon. Present ing Petitions ...

Read ing and Rec eiving Pe titions .. . Prese nting Repor ts by Standing and Special Commit tees ... Min isterial Statements and Tabling of Repor ts ... Notices of Motion ... Introduction of Bills ... Oral Qu estions. The Honour able Memb er tor ln kster. ORAL QU ESTIONS MR. SIDNEY GREEN (lnkster): Mr . Speaker, I would like to direct a qu est ion to the Honour able the First Minis ter, with respect to the proposal by CCIL to obtain public mon ies.

Wou ld the Min ister consider ref erri ng tor rec omm endation on a straight commer cial basis the most recent proposal of CC IL to the Manitoba Dev elop ment Corpor ation Board of Directors, which in the past tour years, Mr . Speaker, has not re commende d any commercial enterprise wh ich has had a problem, with the exce ption of one $300 tho usand loss which was participated in by the private sector as well.

But other than that in the last tour years noth ing that that ex isting Board of Directors has done has resulted in any losses to the pe ople of Man itoba, and thei r last financial year shows a $4.5 million profit. Will the Minister consider re ferri ng this qu estion to them tor rec ommend ation on a straight comm ercial basis? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able First Min ister. HON. STERLING LYON (Charleswood) : Mr .

Speaker, I think we have dealt with this qu estion at some length, but I would be able to say to my honour able friend, the Me mber tor ln kster, that the proposals that were before us up until last Friday, when my colle ague, the Minister of'Finance, gave the governm ent's decision to CCI L, that matter is closed.

If CCI L have further matters or proposals to make, I can only assur e my honour able friend that they will be consid ered care fully by the government and by any experts, or any expert advice that the government has available to it with respect to making a decision on a straight commer cial basis, as my honour able friend says, without tear or favour, but also with full protect ion to the taxpayer. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member tor ln kster. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, I assu me, and I hope I am correct, that when the honour able member says any group of exper ts that the government has that he would include on that the exist ing MD C Board of Directors, which has performed so satisfactorily over the last tou r years. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er tor St. Bon iface. MR. LAURENT L. DESJARDINS (St. Boniface): Mr . Speaker, I have a qu estion tor the Honour able Minister of Health. Is the Min ister satisfied that the late Mrs.

Foster, I think, was sent home properly from the Misericordia Hospital dur ing the partial st rike, not only because of her cond ition, but the condition of her hu sband - he was the only one to take care of her and who had a pacemaker? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Health. HON. L. R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Mr . Sp eaker, the honour able mem ber asked me whether I am satisfied that Mrs. Foster was sent home properly. The answer to that que st ion is yes, I am satisfied . MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er tor St. Boniface. MR.

DESJARDINS: With that I don' t know if my honour able friend doesn't know-w ould he st ill be satisfied after being informed that people were kept in the hospital that, in tact, had not even been paneled tor personal care homes that had no busi ness in an acute bed, and that had a private room at Mis ericordia Hospital, is he still satisfied that these pe ople should have stayed and Mrs. Foster should have been sent home tor her sick hu sband to take care of? MR. SHERMAN: Mr . Speaker, the hono urable member may be putting a mor al que stion. What he asked me was whether I was satisfied that Mrs.

Foster was dis charged properl. The answer to that 297

Friday, December 2, 1977 question is yes, I am satified that she was. MR. DESJARDINS: Let me ask a que stion to my honour able friend. Is he satisfied that other people then were kept when Mr s. Foster was released, people who had no busi ness there at all? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I can only tell the honour able member what I know. I have been advised that the discharge of Mrs. Foster was a medical decision made between the Chie f Medic al Officer of the hosp ital and Mrs. Foster's own physician. Ther efore, she was dis charged proper ly to my satisfiaction. Those are the parameters for such discharges.

That is the only information that I can give the mem ber. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for St. Boniface with a final que st ion. MR. DESJARDINS: Would you then say then that there are certa in rule s for cert ain people and not for others? I am not trying to say that it was a bad med ical deci sion, I am not trying to put the blame on anybody, I want to make that quite clear. I am th inking of the cond ition of her hu sband also, and I am saying right now they are people . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order ple ase. May I inform the Memb er for St.

Bon iface that this is not a time for making statem ents, it is a time for asking qu estions. MR. DESJARDINS: May I ask the Min ister then, Mr. Speaker, is he going to investigate the condition of people that were kept there, that I feel with the statement that is being made, people that had no busine ss in that hospital to start with? MR. SHERMAN: Wel l, Mr. Speaker, the honour able member asked me whe ther I am satisfied with different rules for different people.

As I un der stand it decisions in those cases are made on a medic al basis between the Ch ief Me d ical Officer of the institution and the patient 's own doctor. The patient's own doctor presumably would know some th ing about the patient's family and relatives too. That is the proced ure, that's what was done. I can't answer for every individual requ est that was made by every individu al doctor of every individual patient, but that procedure was carried out. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Me mb er for St. Bon iface has asked two su pplementaries. Order ple ase. Order please.

The Hono urable Member for Lac du Bon net. MR. SAMUEL USKIW (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of the Environment could assure the Hous e that of the four possible sour ces of water poll ution at East Selkir k that measures will be under taken to remove at le ast one of the possible so urces, one of the known possibl e so urces, mainly the pollution emanating from Right Angle Farms. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Mines. HON. BRIAN RANSOM (Souris-Killarney): Mr .

Speaker, I am pleased to be able to inform the honour able member that Righ t Angle Farms as good corporate citizens of Man itoba have agreed to take whatever action is necessary to stop run-off into the qu arry despite the fact that there is no conclusive evidence that that run-off is, in fact, res ponsi ble for the contamination of the wells in East Selkirk. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Lac du Bonne t with a su pplement ary. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder whether the Minister appreciates the fact that whether in fact the water from the farm is ente ring the wells does not take away from the fact that it is still polluting the en viron ment in the area that flows into rivers and streams. That is still an environ mental problem for the communi ty, a stream by the way wh ich is a recrea tional area. -(Inter je ction)- It is also listed as one of the four possible sour ces of the pollution in the wells. The Minis ter the other day . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. MR. USKIW: Wel l, Mr . Speaker, I will ask the Min ister . MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. May I once more ask the mem ber not to make statements, but to ask que st ions. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr . Speaker, I would then ask the Min ister whether he was wrong in his answe to me the other day when he stated that he could not gu arantee that the pollution was not comin� from Right Angle Farms? A MEMBER: That is argum entative. MR. USKIW: It is not argum entative. 298 e r g

Friday, December 2, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minis ter of Mi nes. M_R .. RANSOM: Mr. Sp�aker, I _c an only repeat that th en� are four possible sources of pollution. I said 1� can no t be concl usively said that Right Angle Farms 1s not one of those sources. Neither can it be said tha t they are one of th ose sources. Tha t's his question; I won't respond to his statement. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Me mber for Lac du Bon net. MR. USKIW: Mr .

Speaker, co_uld the min ister then indic ate to the House what actions are being recomm ended to the farm to bring the necessary corrective measu res in to place. -(l nterjec tion) He did n't tell us that. MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Mini ster of Mi nes. MR. RANSOM: Mr . Speaker, the owner s of Right Angle Farms have stated that they are prepared to take wh ateve� action is recomm ended to them. At the mom ent, my department has not made a re_comme_ n�at1on �o. them.

I can also tell th� hono u�able memb er that I will be arran gi ng a meeting with mu�1c1pal offlc1als from_the area.�nd with other inter este� people to discuss the problem. We are proceed ing to attempt to define spec1f 1cally what the problem 1s and then make a recommendation as to how it should be solved. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Me mber for Lac du Bon ne t. MR. USKIW: Mr . Speaker, I would now like to ask the Minis ter of Ind ustry whether it would be possible for him to tab le in this House dur ing this ses sion the report on the loss of capital from Man itoba? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Fort Rouge. MR. LLOYD AXWORTHY: Mr . Speaker, I have a question for the Minis ter of In dustry and Comm erce. I thi nk he would be the appropriate mi nister. That is whether the government in tends to make any representat ion to the CTC heari ngs beginning Monda y concern in g the new airline routes or the dropping of the airlin e route between Winnip eg and Toronto? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minis ter of In dustry and Comm erce. HONOURABLE ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (La Verendrye): Yes, Mr .

Speaker, in a question to the Member for Brandon East in the begi nning of this week I menti oned that we will be making representa tion. The staff is dr awing up a policy paper righ t now. I have just finis hed meeting with them and we will be there on Monda y making a representa tion. MR. AXWORTHY: A supplemen tary, Mr . Speaker. Can the min ister ind icate at this time whe therthe government's position will be in support of the western reg ional carrier maint aining those routes or whether they will be endor sing the application of the eastern regio nal carriers Nordair for access to the Winnip eg mar ket? MR.

BANMAN: Mr . Speaker, as I mentioned, we are just fini shing form ulating a policy on that particular matter. We shou ld have somethin g by tomorrow morning on that and we will be releasing it in due course. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mini ster of Labour. HONOURABLE NORMAL PRICE (Assiniboia): Mr . Speaker, I would like to tell the Member for Chur ch ill in answer to his question I took as notice the other day as to the format that's being used in to the inquir y of the fatal accident at Flin Flon that the Min ing, Engi nee ring and In spection Branch of the Department of Mines is in vestigating it at present.

It is also nor mal proced ure that the RCM P are looking in to it. The Mining In spection Branch is also worki ng on it. As soon as they are all through there will be a full report given to both the company and the steelworkers' uni on. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for ln kster. MR. GREEN: I'd like to di rect a question to the Minis ter of Min es and Resou rces further to the question submitted by the Member for Lac du Bonnet.

Do I under stand from the min ister that the only means of prevent ing effluent from a feedlot from enteri ng in to a stream such as is the case in this circumstance, the only thin g that can be relied on is the good corporate willingne ss of the person who is polluting the stream? Is there no regulation that can deal with this que stion? 299

Friday, December 2, 1977 mr. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minister of Mine s. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, as the ho nour able member knows the reg ulation prohib its any discharge of waste from feed lots into streams and the reg ulation has been in effect since 1973, and there are, I wou ld venture, tho usands of opera tions in Manitoba that are in violation of that re gulation. In this particular case the feed lot in qu estion was following reco mmenda tions that were given to them by the Department of Agl"'iculture. They full y met those reco mmen dations.

They are now prepared to meet whatever other rec om mendations that my depar tment gives them. At the moment they have not been given those reco mmendations but they have expressed a willingness to meet whateverthey are although they do not accept, at this time, that they are re sponsible for the pol lution that is causing the problem. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honou rable minister for his answer.

What I would really like to ask him is whether or not that in addition to - and we won't take it away from them - being good corporate citizens it is also a fact that it is against the law for them to continue to produce this effluent. So what you are saying is they are being good corporate citizens in being willing to obey the law? MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minister of Healt h. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, yesterday I took as notice a que st ion asked of me by the Honourable Mem ber for Fort Rouge relative to possible cutbacks in serv ices or funding for com mun ity residences for the mentally retard ed, with speci fic reference to a resid ence on Ebby Street. I would like to respond to that now, Mr. Speake r, by te lling the hono urable mem ber that as I indicated yesterday there has been no such order issued by my dep artment for any cutback.

The situation per taining to Ebby Street is an old one, it's an old case, it's a special case, outside the gene ral conduct of the normal routine of funding practices and it has been on the books for some time, as a matter of fact it was a problem for the previous administration. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Memb er for Transcona. MR. WILSON PARASIUK (Transcona): Mr . Speaker, my que stion is directed to the Minister of Labour. Does she have an answer for the que stion she took as notice regarding the indu strial death at Borden Chem icals on November 7th? MRS. PRICE: Mr.

Speaker, I do have an answer for the Me m ber for Transcona. The Safety and Health Inspectors in my department and also the Elevator Inspector, all from my de partment are working on it, and there will be a full report given to the Attorney -General's office towards the end of this week, and at that time they will decide whether there will be an inqu est nec essary or not. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Memb er for Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: Thank you.

I was wondering at that time if there is any ind ication or if you can give me any indication as to whether the report wo uld be made public or some means of making the report public to the widow would be done. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MRS. PRICE: Mr. Speaker, I wo uld have to ask the Attorney-General what the format is on that occasion I will be only too happy to get back to the memb er for Transcona. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Min ister of Consume r and Corpor ate Affairs. HON. EDWARD McGILL (Brandon West): Thank you. Mr.

Speaker, on Wednesday last the Mem ber for Brandon East asked me if I would look into the matter of layoffs and demotions of staff in the Traffic Department of the Manitoba Telephone System in the City of Brandon. Mr. Speaker I can report that I am advised by the Manitoba Te lephone System that certain new te chnolo gy de scribed as telephone operator position system will in fact make a difference in the numb er of traffic operators that are req uired by the System, and that the new te chnolo gy is being applied in cer tain cen tres, one of which is Brandon.

As a result of this , there will be some new jobs created for craft perso nnel, but other adj us tments in terms of the categories of emplo yees will be reviewed in the light of these new te chnolo gical improvements. This, Mr. Speaker, may be somewha t red und ant because I believe that the mem ber has received an exp lanation, which he requ ested by le tter, a few days ago from the MTS. Ne ver thele ss, there will be some dis cus sions taking place between Un ion Manageme nt Commit tee in Brandon and officials of MTS in conne ction with this matter. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Memb er for Brandon East. MR.

LEONARD S. EVANS (Brandon East): I thank the hono urable minister for his statement, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I did receive the report yesterday after many, many efforts of trying to get the 300 e

Friday, December 2, 1977 information over some many weeks. I un der stand that the layoffs, and in some instances demotions, are related to tech nological change. I appreciate that. I have a supplemen tary qu estion and that is, whether he as Minister can assure the House that the Manitoba Telephone System will make every effort to place with in that large organization of thousands of empl oyees those persons who may be adversely affected by this tech nological change.

I think this is the qu estion, people mu st accept te chnolo gical change but is there an opportu nity for those people, many of whom have given many many years of good service to the MTS, for those peo ple to be able to be assured of some position within the organization? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Consumer Affairs. MR. McGILL: Mr .

Speaker, I think it could be said that we wou ld expect and assume, and indeed be qu ite satisfied that the Man itoba Telephone System would make ever y effort to provide emp loyment for those a whose categ orie s may be ffected by the changes which are now taking place in tech nology. And again I mention that these matters are going to be discussed, or there will be an oppor tun ity for them to be dis cussed, dur ing this month of December when officials of the MTS visit Brandon. MR. EVANS: I thank the ho nour able min ister for that information. Ju st one final supplem entary, then.

I appreciate his efforts and I appreciate that this matter then is st ill in the process of discussion and that there is a union management agreement involved. ls the min ister tel ling us, however, that he cannot give the Hous e any assurance that there will not be layoffs in Brandon at the Manitoba Te lephone System, of some propor tion? MR. McGILL: Mr .

Speaker, what the member is reques ting would be a very broad statement inde ed, and I can only repeat that every effort is bei ng made to accomm odate any personnel whose categories may be affected by the reduction, due to te chnol ogy, of the nu mb er of traffic operators req uired. But I do point out that there are additional jobs being created in those centres wher e the tech nology is bei ng ins talle d so that the total numb er of jobs may in fact not be reduced and could pos sibly be somewhat increased. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Fort Rouge. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr.

Speaker , I have a qu estion for the First Min ister in reference to the statem ent made by the Minister of Ind ustry and Comme rce that the staff of the dep artment are preparing a position paper to present to the Com mis sion . I wo uld like to know if it is now the practice of the government to allow civil servants to prepar e policy papers for the govern ment and have them presented without any review or exam ination, or dis cussion by the cabinet. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able First Minister. MR. LYON: No, Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Fort Rouge. MR. AXWORTHY: A supplem entar y, Mr .

Speaker. Could the First Min ister indicate then that if in fact these positions on important areas such as transp ortation are only going to be prepared by tomorrow and presented on Mon day, can he ind icate exactly when the government will be und ertak ing an assess ment of those policy paper s and reviewi ng the m so that we can ensur e thatthe elected representatives are making policy and not the civil servants? MR. LYON: Mr . Speaker , I can assure my honour able friend that the government will be giving consideration to the matters that he has raised.

I can equally assure him that when he goes home, as he is able to at five-thirty tonig ht, other memb ers of the government benche s, as I'm sur e our predecessors did, have to stay around to look at preci sely such matters or grab snatches of time from here and ther e to do precisely such things. That's the job of government. It's a job my honour able friends across the way just finished doing. It's a job that we're doing righ t now. It's a job that unfortu nately my hon our able friend will probably never do. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr. Speaker, aside from the weakness of the First .

Min ister's capacity as a progn osticator, which has always been held in doub t, I was wond eri ng if he could ind icate whether in fact the cabinet wanted his review of those docum ents, wheth er he can give us an assurance thatthat pos ition paper will be tabled in this Ho use and will in fact have been care fully reviewed by the fu ll cabinet so that we can ensur e that it is a docum ent and a pos ition paper that is endor sed by the enti re govern ment. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. My qu estion is directed to the Minis ter of Labour.

I gave her some advance notice on th is. ls she in a position to tell me whether inquiries have been setup into 301 h

Friday, December 2, 1977 two more indus trial deaths in Transcona within the last week or so, namely the one at the CNR caused supposedly by an explosion of an anti-tank missile, and one involving a construc tion accident on Pandora Street? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Labour. MRS. PRICE: Mr . Speaker, I contacted the director of the Workplace Safety who looks after this and the man that is in charge of it is out of town atthe time and he said that he was qu ite confident that there had been somebody sent to the site. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Selkirk. MR. PAWLEY: Mr .

Speaker, a qu estion to the Honour able the Attorney-General further to the question that you took as notice Friday, and further on Tuesday. Notwithsta nding the fact that he may not be able to provide me with information perta ining to the comme ncement date of the Family Court project, could the Attorney-Gener al provide assurance to the Hous e that the Family Cour t Pilot Project will be launched dur ing the calendar year 19 78? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Attorney-Gener al. HONOURABLE GERALD W.J. MERCIER (Osborne) : Mr .

Speaker, the project to which my honourable friend has referred is un der review and as soon as we're in a position to make an annou ncement it will be made. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Ind ustry and Comm erce. MR. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. I'd like to reply to a que stion that the Leader of the Opposition put to the Premier a couple of days ago with regards to the conne ction of the MD C and the Manitoba For estry Comple x.

On March 25th, 19 75, an agreement which prescribes that the Manitoba Forestry Resou rces Limited has issued from the province of Manitoba mo neys for the operations in the form of preferred sh ares in the capital stock and as a result any freeze as it relates to the Manitoba Dev elopmen t Corpor ation has no effect on that particular comple x. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Selkirk. MR. PAWLEY: Mr . Speaker, my que stion to the Minister of Mines and Environmental Management, in respect to the dismissal by him of the appeal by the Rur al Mu nicipality of West St.

Paul re Cle an Environm ent Commi ssion Order, did the honour able mem ber give consider ation to referral of the appeal to the Mun icipal Board? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Healt h. MR. SHEAN: Mr . Speaker, this morning I took as notice a qu estion from the Honou rable the Member for St. Boniface which I'd like to respond to now. The member asked me whether previously annou nced construc tion at the Manitoba School at Portage was affected by the freeze. The answer to the que stion, Mr .

Speaker, is that the only capital constru ction item approved by the previous administration for that school in the 19 77-78 fiscal year was the new recreation building. As of this date nothing has moved on that building. Nothing was being done on it by the previous administrations so the situation remains exact ly where it has been for the past several months. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr . Speaker , is my honour able friend saying that there is no freeze on tha project? MR. SHERMAN: No, Mr. Speaker , I'm not saying that.

But what I'm saying is that the situatior remains exactly where it has been for the past several months. Nothing was being done on it at thii ju ncture anyway. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr . Speaker, then the answer is, yes, this is affected by the freeze. It's i different thing. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for St. Vital. MR. D. JAMES WALDING: Mr . Speaker ' my qu e stion is to the Minister of Health and concerns th1 matter raised earlier this afte rnoon by the Honour able Me mber for St. Boniface.

Can the honour abl1 minister confirm that the patient was discharged from the hospital without any supply of pain-kill in! dr ugs? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Health. 302 o s s s t n s a e e g

Friday, December 2, 1977 MR. SHERMAN: Mr . Speaker , I'd uave to ask the honour able mem ber to repeat that qu es tion. I'm sorry, I was read ing some material on my de sk and I apolog ize. MR. WALDING: Mr . Speaker, I asked the hon our able minister if he could confirm that the patient in question was dischar ged from the hosp ital without being given a supply of pain-killing dr ugs? MR. SHERMAN: Mr . Speaker , perhaps I could ask the honour able member if the patient to which he is re fer ring is the one that was involved in the earl ier exc hange between myself ... Mrs. Foster's?

I don' t know that to be the situation, Mr . Speaker. I know that the dischar ge was carried out under proper medic al procedu res followed by all such institu tions in those cases. I can't tell the honour able member what suppl ies of drugs accomp anie d the patient. I presume her doctor would have taken all those cond itions into account. MR. WALDING: Mr . Speaker , can the honour able min ister confirm that the pharmacy at the hospital was closed on that day? MR. SHERMAN: No, I can't confirm that, Mr . Speaker, but I migh t jus t say that the honour able member and the Honour able Memb er for St.

Boniface appear to be asking me to make a ju dgement on a med icaldecision. I can't make a jud gement on a medic al deci sion. Whether it was the right or wrong medic al decision I would not presume to com ment. A medic al decision was made. MR. SPEAKER: Order ple ase. Order ple ase. If the Member for St. Bon iface has got a point of privilege ... ? MR. DESJARDINS: Yes, Mr . Speaker, the honour able min ister is trying to place words in my mouth and that's not the que st ion I asked him at all. I did n't ask him about a medi cal de cision.

I asked him if he was satisfied that they should priorize and allow this woman to leave ... MR.SPEAKER: Order , order please. That is not a point of privilege. Order please. The Honour able Member for St. Vital. The Ho nour able Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR. SCHREYER: Yes, my point of order , Sir, is that it is important in terms of de finition as to what constitutes a point of privilege.

I believe, Sir, that the rule s will show that misquo tation, impu tation of motives, wrong paraphrasing, attribution of remarks that are not correct attributed to anyone is a very bona tide point of privilege. MR. SPEAKER: Is this on a point of order ? The Honour able Minister of He alth. MR. SHERMAN: I do n't mind attempti ng to answer the honour able member 's que stions but I sugge st that neither the honour able memb er or the Honour able Leader of the Opp osition have a point at all in this case.

I was asked a series of que st ions by the honour able member which I interpret as requesting of me a judg ment on a me dical de cision. That is the way I read the que st ions from the honourable memb er. I have a per fect right to state th at, he has no point of privilege on that point whatever. I am prepared to accept whatever other que st ions he may wish to put. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: On the same point of order, ... right to interpret the que st ion the way he wants.

But I don' t think that he has the right to misstate the que st ion and I did not ask him the qu es tion. I asked him if he was satisfied. I did not ask anything about a medic al person, I asked him if he was satisfied that the priorizing was done properly and that a person was allowed to stay in a private room - a person that had never even been panell ed to go in a personal care home -w hen a woman was released to go to her hu sband alone , who has a pacemaker , and I ask him if that was proper priorizing.

I am not blaming anything on the doctor for what happened to this person, I am saying is that proper proceed ing, and is that the way we are going to treat the peop le of Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr . Speaker, on the same point of order , I will be interested in check ing the record but the honour able mem ber did not start his series of que st ions by asking me that at all. He asked me if I was satisfied with the procedure , the proper procedure had been followed.

He was Min ister of Health for several years, he knows what the procedure is, and what I am saying to him is he knows full well that procedure was follo wed properly. That is my answer to him. If he is asking me to make a judg ment, which I sug gested he did, and I was immedia tely told I was imputing motives, I say I can't make that judgment. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, I will check the record of Hansard to see whether or not ther e is a 303

Friday, December 2, 1977 point of privilege. The Honour able Mem ber for St. Vital. MR. WALDING: Mr. Speaker, if I might not ask my final supp lem entar y to the Minister of Health, and ask him if he wou ld consider looking further into this matter, includ ing the availability of morphine to physicians in this city. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Yes, I will, Mr . Speaker. I would be pleased to cooperate with the Honour able Me mber for St. Vital on that point. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Op position. MR. SCHREYER: Mr .

Speaker, my que stion is not supple mentar y but flows related, it from the answer given by the Minister of He alth to the Honour able Memb er for St. Boniface. May I ask the honour able minister that when he said that nothing had been done at the Portage Home, can I ask him to assure this House that the staff-to-patient ratio at the Portage Home will be maintained at present levels and not allowed to revert back to a ratio of one to th ree as existed in years gone by. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr .

Speaker, I cannot give the Honour able Leader of the Opp osition that assurance at this time. I wo uld say to him thoug h that when I said nothing had been done I was talking about the construc tion, and the constru ction freeze referred to by his colle ague relevant to one specific un it, which is the new recreation building. On the staff-to-patient ratio that, Sir, is un der review. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Me mb er for Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: Thank you, Mr . Speaker.

I am not sur e whether I should ask this que stion to the minister responsible for the Emergency Me asu res Organization, but I will ask it to the First Minister indirectly. Would he contact the Armed Services to have them do a check in Transcona and ensure that there are no more supp osed anti-tank missiles lying around in Transcona. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Transcona with a supple m entary. MR. PARASIUK: I was not asking that que stion in jest.

If in fact, someone is blown up by an anti tank missile thirty or forty years after a war, I think that it is not a silly qu estion to ask that a check be made. I don' t know if there are some lying around or not, and I said I wou ld have asked that to the minister in charge of the Emergency Me asures Organization had I thought that that was the person that should do it, but I tho ug ht it would add more weight if the First Minister did it directly, and that is why I asked the que stion in that way. -(Interj ectio n)- It is not a joke. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Me m ber for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to addr ess a que stion to the Minister of Health and Social Deve lopm ent, and ask the honour able minister if he can advise the Hous e of the status of the Children's Dental Care Program which was instituted by the previous Ne w Dem ocratic Party government. Is it the government 's intention to freeze this program at its present level or are you planning to continue on with the expansion and cover the entire province as was the plan of the previous government. As you realize only a portion of the province is covered.

As a matter of fact, part of my constituency is un der the plan and the City of Brandon , which is another

section of my constituen cy, is not unde r the plan. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr . Speaker, I wou ld like to assure the honour able member that this is a program that has occup ied a great deal of my time since I was appointed to my portfolio. It is a program in which I have a deep personal inter est and I hope I will be able to annou nce policies in that area that will meet with the honour able mem ber's supp ort and enth usiasm. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Brandon East, with a supplem entary. MR. EVANS: Yes, a supplemen tary.

I thank the honour able minister for his answer. I wonder if he is in a position to give the House any idea of the time frame of policy making, decision making, about approximately when would he be able to advise the pu blic of Manitoba, if not the Hous e, the pu blic o1 Manitoba when this decision will be made. MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr . Speaker , I suppose it would sou nd cavalier to say as soon a possible, bul that is precisely the position I am in with an empha sis on the soon, because the honour able membe1 304 s t f t r

Friday, December 2, 1977 un der stands full well I am sur e that there are contractural obligations involved and they cannot be le ft hanging for an undu e period of time , so I think I can un derl ine the word soo n. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Me mb erfor St. Bon iface and may I remind all gentlemen there are only two minu tes left. M�. DESJARDINS: Mr . Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Health to clarify one of the answers that he Just gave. When he says that nothing was done at the school in Portage, does he mean exactly that, or does he mean that the cons truction had not started. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of He alth. MR. SHERMAN: I mean, Mr . Speaker , that the construction had not been started. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: Thank you Mr . Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister of Ur ban Affairs who I assume is resp onsible for the Emergency Me asures Organization for indicating that he will look into the matter. I thank him for being courteous on this . As for the other memb er who I directed the que stion to, sleep we ll. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order ple ase.

I point out to the honou rable mem ber who has ju st spoken that the qu estion period is to be used to elicit information, not to make state ments. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the onou rable Memb er for Pem bina and the proposed amendm ent moved by the Honour able Leader of the Opp osition. The Honour able Memb er for St. James. THRONE SPEECH DEBATE MR. MINAKER: Mr . Speaker, this is the first oppor tu nity that I have had to speak in the House during this ses sion.

I would like to take the oppor tun ity, Sir, to congratulate you, on your position as the Speaker of this Ass embly and I am confident that you will do a thor ough and ef ficient job, like you always have in any other responsibi lities that you have had in this Chamb er. I would also like to cong ratulate the mem bers who have been el ected to the Hous e. MR. SPEAKER: Order , order please. The Honour able Memb er for Lac Du Bonne t has a qu es tion. MR. USKIW: Mr . Speaker, the honou rable member stated that this is his first oppor tunity to speak, I am wondering whe ther he would exp lain that to us. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for St. Jame s. MR. MINAKER: Mr . Speaker, I see that the mem bers on the other side are still full of exuberance and still but also a little smar ting. Ju st a little bit. Anyways, Mr . Speaker, I would also like to congratulate the Cabine t em bers and I am confide nt that they will do a good job forpeople of Manitoba, and I would also like to cong ratulate the mover and the seconder of the Thr one Speech.

I know what it is like to give a maiden speech in this Hous e and I was fortunate to have a Ho use Leader thatwhen one stands up to make that maiden speech all eyes will be up on and the House will be watching and listening to the gen eral attitudes of your introd ucting speech and first impressions are lasting impres sions I am proud to say that in my opin ion the mover and the seconder of the Throne Speech, I believe, gave an ex cel lent contribut ion and I believe will be respected in this House by all members of the House and will be listened to and will be accepted.

I would also like to comment particularly that I was greatly impressed with the speech of the honou rable memb er for Wellington. I thought it was an excellent contribution to the de bate and I am sur e he will have many more contributions to make during de bate in this legi slature and I am looking forward to heari ng him speak in this Cham ber. I would also like to take the oppor tun ity to thank the pe ople of St. Jame s constituency for find ing the confidence to re-elect me. I know in the last elect ion ther e was some thought by people that possibly I was elected as a backlash to the government putting St.

Ja mes into Un icity. It felt gratifying to be re-elected and with a greater plur ality this time so that I thank the St. Ja mes people and it will be my du ty and effort to see that they are well represented in this House. Mr. Speaker, I notice the difference on the govern ment side from the opposi tion side and I am sure the memb ers on the op posite side also notice it. I'm sur e ther e mu st be a load off their should ers and 305

Friday, December 2, 1977 that they feel a little freer now and I would think particu larly the back�be nch memb ers - we've already heard more from them than we often did when they were in govern ment. I'm sur e that their comrade ship will probably impr ove too when the y're in opp osition. Mr . Speaker, I also noted with inter est that the Hon our able Memb erf or ln kster is still in good form and still able to keep the rapt attention of everybody in this House when he stands up and speaks. The honour able mem ber is still doing the same techniques.

He'll set up a particular working model to explain something and set his criteria, but he 'll le ave out some major items that affect the final results. I'm referring to the ex planation of the ten pe ople in the room - be careful govern ment, because out of those ten people, five voted for the government, four voted for the op position and one voted for the Liberal, and it just takes one. Mr. Speaker, wh at the honour able mem berfor I nkster failed to mention was what affects that five, four , one re lations hip is the leader. We know that there is a leadership going on over on the other side.

It's qu ite obvious. With all due respect to the Honour able Leader of the Op position who is a good leader in the eyes of the oppo sition, he has indicated that well he's in or he's out, we're not too sure. It's qu ite obvious from the speeches given to date, that the Honour able Mem ber ln kster is in the leadership race and it's rightfully so. I would say, Mr . Speaker, that of anybody on that side he deserves to be the le ader if their present leader decides to leave. Then what happens to the ratio?

What happens to that room when we walk into that room with the ten suppor ters and the hono urable mem ber for ln kster is the le ader? Now it's the PC government with seven, two and one. Then if the Honour able Mmb er from Lac du Bon net decides to run, I think we'd end up seven, two and one too, because both gentlemen bel ieve that the land of this count ry should be owned by the government and only the government. That will affect that five, four, one ratio.

I am confident that if this opposition continues in the manner it has to date in deba te in this legislatu re, it won't be five, four, one, I'm confident it will probably be six, th ree, one for the Progressive Con servative government next time around. One can use numb ers and the honour able member forgot one little thing, the leadership change which will occur over there. I wish him luck in attaining the leadership because I bel ieve he would make a good leader of the opposition. Mr . Speaker, I also enjoyed the story of the thr ee envelopes.

I've heard it before from our Hono urable Ho use Leader but I'm trying to figure out why the Hon our able Ho use Leader the Op position, why he hasn't explained to his colle agues that those envelopes were written by the government, not by the op position, because they have already opened up the envelope and the y're blaming the new government, they're blaming the federal government on the de ficits that have been created because of lack of transfer payments. What I haven't figured out, Mr . Speaker, is what they have in that third envelope. Maybe we 'll find out, I don't know. MR.

Speaker, I would like to remind the opposition of - and they're fu lly aware of it - what their attitude of the publi c was prior to the el ectio n, what their attitude was to government ownership, wh at their attitude was to government control, what their attitude was to government involvement in their private lives. I think they answered, Mr . Speaker, the people of Manitoba answered what they thought about government involvement in people's lives. The y answered with forty nine, thirty nine, ele ven percent for the Liberals.

I have to remind the opp osition because they still feel that they have the majo rity of people wanting government control, wanting government ownership of bu sinesses, wanting the government involvement in every-day life. I get that reaction being fed back to me in all the speeches. Yet, before the ele ction when you talked to the truck dr ivers, they said we're going to vote for you this time. I ran into su pporters who said I voted NOP but this time I'm voting PC. We've had it, we've had it up to here with government involvement. This is what we were told. - (Interjectio n)- Well, Mr .

Speaker , I don't think we 'll ever hear that in Bu rrows. The Honour able Mem ber for Bu rrows, I would grant, probably could sit in this Chamb er for the rest of his life and be re-elected and be re-elected. -(I nter jectio n)- Mr. Speaker , I wasn't campaigning at Burr ows so I don't know what they were saying in Bu rrows. I can te ll you what they were saying in St. James. They were tired of government in business. What did the honour able memb er for Seven Oaks say the other day in his presentation?

He thought that publi c money should be used for pu blic - I agree with you - that we should basically see that pu blic money is used for the publi c, but don't take the money if you don' t have to use it, leave it with the pu blic. Leave it with them. I ask you, Mr .

Speaker , using publ ic mone y to build bus es that were so ld to transit syste ms in the Un ited States, transit systems in Alberta, transit systems in Ontario, that were sold below what they actually cost to be built, is that using pub lic money for use by the publi c of Manitoba wh en we end up subsidizing these other transit systems? -(ln terjection) That was good pub lic use of the mone y for the peop le in San Francisco.

Was it good use of publi c money to build airplanes the major portion of which were going to be used outside the province be low wh at it cost to build them and end up with a forty million dol lar cost that the Pu blic of Manitoba has to pay for? Is that why the people of Manitoba said "yes, we've had it up to here with government involved in every thing". This is why we're on this side Mr . Speaker. This is why we're on this side. This is why there was forty nine percent of the vote came over here. Pe ople were fed up with the government being involved in busi ness. They also wanted a cutback in spending.

They were tired of looking at their paycheque at the end of the month and seeing all the mone y going for income tax. The y were tired of it, yet this opposition stands up and accuses the government that is thirty five days old, of being re sponsible for six hundr ed and fifty jobs being laid off at INCO. Who bel ieves it? Does the Honour able Mem ber for Kild onan believe that? Does he really bel ieve that the six hundr ed and fifty pe ople that are going to be laid off at INCO were the cause of this new government? The honour able mem ber for Rup ert sl and in his speech the other day said that this new 306

Friday, December 2, 1977 government was responsible for sh utting down CCIL. When was it? Back in May they shu t down on skeleton staff. Was the Progressive Cons ervative government in power then in May? Yet this oppos ition is making statements like that. Mr . Speaker , ther e's one basic difference between a governmen t-operated busine ss and a private-owned busi ness. I do n't know - several of the honour able memb ers on the oppo site side have owned busi nesses or own their own busi ness and they know what I'm talking about.

If you run a success ful busine ss, or attempt to run a successful busine ss busine ss, there are fo ur basic rules: First you pay your em ployees; seco ndly you pay your taxes that are taken off, income tax or if you happen to make a profit at the end of the year, a corpo rate tax; thirdly you pay your suppl iers and then at the bottom of the roll if there is any money le ft, the owner gets it. Now if a busine ss continues to operate for a nu mber of years where there isn't any money le ft after you've gone th rough the th ree steps, you start to put in what is known as sharehold ers' loans.

That's wh at's been happen ing with gover nmen t-busine sses in Man itoba. On e, they paid their employees. Two, they don't have to necessarily pay taxes, they have to pay the payroll deductions, the income taxes to the federal govern ment. It's my un der standing that in one of the opera tions that is presently government owned that we've had to issue spec ial warrants to cover payroll ded uctions that have not been paid to the federal govern ment. Thirdly, pay your suppl iers.

Fourthl y, if ther e's a profit le ft- wel l so farthere are not too many compan ies that we have had that have been operat ing at a profit - in over a period of time then you start to put in the shar eholder s' loans. That's what we've been doing in Flyer. That's what we've been doing in Sau nder s. That's what we did in ManFor granted . Mr . Speaker, the people of Manitoba are the shar eholde rs. They are the shareh olde rs ttat are putting in these loans. Our government has decide d that hey, le t's put on the brakes and see what's happen ing. Now, is that wrong? Is this wrong, Mr .

Speaker, to put the control on the spen ding because what happens wh en you have to start borrowing money to pay inter est charges? What happens, Mr . Speaker, to a busine ss? That's the same as writing a cheque that will bou nce. If you tried to do that in private life, what would happen if you start to try and write cheq ues to borrow money to pay for mo ney that has already been spent or interest charges? This is what the province was get ting itself into. Yet, Mr .

Speaker, the oppo sition is trying to claim that thr ough the restra ints that we're gui lty of the six hundr ed and fifty empl oyees who will be phased out of !NCO. We're guilty of the fact that back in May there were only a hundr ed people left to work at CCIL. Who are they trying to fo ol, Mr. Speaker, because the people of Manitoba weren't fooled the last time when they kept saying, well, we're in great shape, we're doing every thing, that the eco nomy is great. The Hono urable Me mber for Kildonan, I bel ieve, is in the construction indus try, or has closeness to it.

He knows that the construction ind ustry hasn't been healthy for the last year and a half. It's been starting to peak. He knows that the un emplo yment was high in the construction indu stry and it did n't happen overn ight. It didn't happen thirty-five days ago, it's been building up. And why has it been building up? Why has it been building up, Mr. Speaker ? Because the people who were able to invest in Manitoba did n't want to invest here. Why did n't they want to invest here?

Because we had a corporate tax that was highe r, we had income tax that was higher; we had inheritance tax if a chap owned a family busi ness and he wanted to pass it on to his sons and daug hters. This all builds up, Mr . Speaker.

This busi ness climate builds up into a state where peop le say: "I'm not going to stay in Manitoba," or "I'm not co ming to Manitoba." So a new governm ent comes in and says: "Well, let's change this busi ness climate ." And we've taken the step, at le ast it's the first step, in reducing income tax, and red ucing corpo rate tax, and getting rid of the inher itance state tax, hoping and confident that the pe ople will now rec ognize Manitoba as another area in Canada where they can estab lish a busine ss.

The labor market is her e; we know that people are her e to work and provide the needed manpower to operate these facilities. They know that they will have an oppor tun ity to com pete with other provinces now, based on taxes and so forth. So why won' t they come in? Why won't they come in? Th ere's a much better opportun ity for them to come in now than there was a month ago. And you can feel it on the street, Mr. Speaker, when you talk to people. The day after the election they felt re lieved - many of them - it was ther e.

I don't know whether my ho nour able membe rs on the oppo sition side felt it; maybe the people that they were talking with did n't feel that way, but I'll tel l you, some forty-nine to fifty-nine percent of Manitoba felt that way. -(I nterject ion)- Mr . Speaker, it's obvious that our opp osition memb ers wi ll do a good job in opposi tion, and that's what this Chamber 's all about, making sur e that the govern ment does its best job.

But I would like to rem ind the oppo sition that I represent all people in my cons tituency, the same way they do, and I don' t always bel ieve in the philo sop hie s that some twenty -nine percent, I think it is, who voted for the NOP. But I st ill represent them, and when the Hon our able Me mb er for I nkster says that we have thirty-nine percent on our side, you people also represent the numb er of people who didn' t vote for you over there, and they're watching. So it's not jus t a simple trade.

I would think particularly they'l l be watching the Honou rable Member for Ch urch ill; I'm confident that the people in Ch urch ill are not as far left as the Honour able Memb er for Ch urch ill is. They'll be watching carefully, they'll be watching very carefully. And it might be relaxing to be on the opposition side to throw out the remarks and the wild statements, and so on, but don' t forget that we represent not only the people that ele cted you but also the other pe ople. The y'll be watching, so that five -four-one isn't as simple as the Hon our able Memb er for ln kster puts it out to be. Mr .

Speaker, I am confident that the proposals that are being put forward by our government, the tax changes will bring back deve lopm ent in Manitoba and we 'll get the economy rolling again. But it won't be a switch -w e can just flip the light switch and every thing turns bright tod ay. The opposition 307

Friday, December 2, 1977 feels that that's the way it should be, but we kne w it would n't be that way, that it would take a little wh ile, it'll take a year or so to get going. Bu t at least we're trying, Mr. Speaker. I'm confident that this is the right approach to the problem and what the people of Man itoba wanted. Th ank you very mu ch. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for Seven Oaks has a qu est ion? MR. SAUL A. MILLER: Yes, if the mem ber will accept a que st ion.

The memb er in his remarks sugg ested that the sl ump in construction in Manitoba was due to the tax policies of the former govern ment, the ones that are based on the ability-to-pay. How does he expl ain the slump in Ontario, of even in greater degr ee than occu rred in Manitoba? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Me m ber for St. Ja mes. MR. MI NAKER: Mr. Speaker, the only thing I can say is maybe because it's a minor ity government there, and there is even fear that pos sibly the oppo sition migh t become government some day. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Memb er for Winnipeg Centre. MR. J.R. (Bud) BOYCE: Mr.

Speaker, I'm going to be brief. I had wonder ed what I could contribute to this debate, but then I thought that perhaps it would be more intere st ing to the people of Manitoba to listen to what the Leader of the Opposition - I did it too - the Premier has to say relative to this supposedly shor t ses sion. But I can't let the oppor tunity go by, Mr . Speaker, without welc oming the ne w mem bers.

I had wis hed that the government would have taken this opportunity to allow their members to speak, because it isn't a re gular ses sion, in that we get the oppor tun ity in the parry and trust of es timates to really ge t to know each other. So I though t on the throne speech debate thattheir tactics would be thatthey would expose their new mem bers to the public, but this wasn't the case. It not being a reg ular ses sion, fello ws are more kind than they were when I was a new memb er.

If you recall the first time I stood up to try and put my foot in my mouth , somebody said my fly was open, or some thing, and it really th rew me off. But I want to commend the min isters in the way that they have tried to dig in and find the answers. I figur e I owe some of the fe llows on the other side a debt of gratitude, because some three years ago they stuck me with a portfolio, a few months before es timates and the fello ws were relatively kind to me dur ing the es timates. They didn 't try to stick my hide on a fence. But, Mr.

Speaker, some of the comm en ts that have taken place in this deba te - for ex ample the Mem ber for St. James mentioned the Me mber for lnkster's argum ent the other day, and I'm sorry the Me mber for ln kster isn't her e because I wanted to te ll him that I've already got my one. This woman phone d me and she said she was glad I had won.

She had voted against me, but she was glad I had won, because she had been trying to get in touch with the Premier 's office and one of the programs that they froze and cut out was a mod est program that emp loyed a few people that were having difficulty get ting emplo yment, taking people to the hospital , taking people for doctors' appointments - a small program , a modest program, but they cut it out. And they were trying to contact the Premier 's office to raise their objections but of course they could n't get through to the Prem ier. And I un d erstand this, because he's a busy man.

But nevertheless, as an old-age pensi oner this had already cost her $20.00, and she wondered how she was going to be able to sus tain this after being prom ised. And she bel ieved some of the things that the Con servatives were going thr ough the province and frighten ing people and te lling them that they were going to do much mor e for the sen ior citizens than we were ever able to do. Mr .

Speaker, I was a little bit apprehensive when we went into oppo sition, because I thoug ht maybe we were going back into limb o, but the y've restored my faith over there, because theywant to go right back into, you know, the days of almost Little Lloyd Fauntler oy su its, where people behaved themselves and they ge t along to work for what the company te lls you to work for, that you will prev ail, that you will succeed in life, that you can catch the brass ring.

It's almost as if the tunes that were played fifty years ago have been resurrected, so the y're restor ing my faith that me being in opposition will not be too long . Mr . Speaker, there were many people who thought that this party would never form a government. But one thing that they can never take away from the government is the fact of the opposition at the time, that we did form a gove rn ment. And there are many things that we did for the people.

When people talk about gover nm ent spe nding, and it's regrettable that we have the kind of fifth estate that we have that doesn' t try to edu cate people in ju st exactly what the y get for tax dollars. The y get serv ices for tax dol lars. And when the provincial auditor goes out and ins ists that we account for things in a particular way, then he should at the same time come out with a balance she et. When he says that we owe three billion dol lars, he should at the same time come out and tell the people of the province of Manitoba how much we own for that 3 billion dollars.

Man itoba Housing and Renewal, for exam ple ... how mu ch of the assets of Manitoba Housing and Rene wal? What are they worth in current terms? If we took every government operation that we, the taxpayers of the province of Manitoba owned and put them up on one side, and put the insign ificant figures that you run around scaring people with on the other side, then people would finally see throug h it. If we operated the Manitoba Tel ephone System as Bell does, what do you think this is worth? If we operated Manitoba Hydro as private comp anie s do, what do you think it would be worth?

And there are private companies sel ling power, but yet, no, ttey go around and say: "govern men ts can't operate busi ness." 308

Friday, December 2, 1977 Hogwash . Hogwash. Publi c insur ance ... you're going to go back to the good old days of the private sector? -(Inter jecti on)- Wel l I know they want busine ss to oper ate govern ment, but it's inef ficient busi ness that wants to operate the government. Mr . Speaker, I belie ve in enterprise. I bel ieve that if somebody saves mone y, that they're entitled to a return on that inves tment. I bel ieve that if people work harder, that they're entitled to more than somebody who doesn't work harder. But, nevertheless -(Interje ction)- Oh no, I'm not.

I belie ve that if we're going to use taxpayers' dol lars in any venture, that we're accou ntable to the publ ic. This is good, bad , we've gained, we've lost. But take for exam ple down in your own area -(l nterjec tion) Why did Canadian Canner s get out of Mo rden? Why? Because Canad ian Canners went to the federal govern ment, and the federal governme nt's got a pot of money. Unemplo yment in Qu ebec: they're going to solve their problems of unemp loyment in Qu ebec by exp anding the canning capacity in Que bec. They built a new plant in Qu ebec. The y let that one rot down there and they finally closed it.

And, Mr. Speaker, if I was on the Board of Directors of Canadian Canners, I wo uld have made the same decision. But my resp onsibil ity to the sto ckhold ers of that company is to re tur n the best I can on their investm ent, but nevertheless in the public interest. To the people in you r constituency, in your area, th ey're trying to raise spec ial crops to make-a dol lar, make-a-living; it's the wo rst thing that can happen. But this is what happened - private busine ss, private sector - this is a myth that some of you people who havn't been in busi ness don't know about, and it really ranckle s me.

I stood up on that side of the Ho use and suppor ted the Minister of Agricu lture on this assistance to farmers. The peo ple in this province want to work together to stabilize their prod uction, I'll put a hundr ed mill ion dol lars into it. But nevertheless when farmers need help, it's help; but in the city of Winnipeg when my people need work and need jobs, you can't run a busi ness. How many jo bs at Flyer? How many jobs at the co-op? What are our people su pposed to do? -(Inter ject ion)- Starve? Put them on welfare. Let them eat cake. Oh no, no, no. Wel l, don' t get excited, I'll te ll myself that.

A MEMBER: Keep it cool, Bud. MR. BOYCE: I'll give you a chance. I'll wait and see. The pe ople lining up to come back. I remember the head line in the Winnipeg Free Press that se nds the blind reporter over here that can't even count people in the gallery, that Man itoba was a good place to be from. In 1969 that head line was in the Winnipeg Free Press. I'll wait for all of the success stories to hit the front page of the Winnipeg Free Press. But, Mr . Speaker, I jus t cou ld n't sit back and let my good friend over there from St. James get away with that which he laid on us.

But I can't help but mention also that this session was su pposed to have been to take care of the five-four decision of the Su preme Cour t, so the Chie f Ju stice agrees that we're right. I was around when they made this decision and the argum ents and the sug gestions were that we did have the authority to proceed in this manner , to make ourselves part of the federal anti inflation program - I'm st ill of that opinion but that doesn't make any difference. The Chie f Ju stice and I, as far as the outcome is concerned, have to pass legis lation, that's the way it is.

But to be dragged into this House to foresta ll family law, that's another thing. And the Attorney-Gener al, who I respect, in his capacity with the City Council I fou nd that he is a man of integrity and he did what he said he cou ld do. But I'm sorry. Next year I do n't th ink that this leg islation is going to be reintroduced at all, I th ink it will die. I think this is -(Inter ject ion)- I'm entitled to my opinion.

That the principle s that are involved will go by the board; that you want to pass legisla tion at this sess ion wh ich was only called - only necessitated by the five-four decisions of the Supr eme Cour t - that you want to do away with estate taxes. I'm so rry I can't get too excited about that. The Leader of the Op position -(Inter ject ion)- the Premie r, yes, wel l, he st ill thinks he is the Leader of the Oppo sition.

I wish he'd stop chirping from his seat and then maybe I would think of him as the Premier. -(l nterjec tion)-Well, we 'll keep wor king at it, you keep wor king to keep me here and I'll keep wo rking to get you out, okay? That's fair enoug h. But when you're talking about saving $5 million, for whom? The last figures that are out - 148 estates or some th ing like that. And I have to go back to peo ple on the te lephone and say that you can't even find a few bucks to haul people that can't get to the doctor, that this is the kind of prog ram that you're cutting back.

You come out and you say that you're going to make it better for senior citizens and then cut out taxes for these peop le. It makes it most difficult except that you're insurin g once more, more people learn that you re ally haven't got an interest people, that they can either have welfare or un emp loyment insur ance or eat cake, or whatever you want. But, , one and three-quarters over time, one and th ree-quarters over time. Time and a half, they don't pay time and a half they only pay time and a qu arter or time and a third or some thing else like that.

You've got to create jobs by encour aging peop le to work somebody a little e xtra rather than see if they can accommodate somebody for a ful l-time job. That's the essence of it, you'r e not going to solve their problem. If you come up with some kind of a program coupled to the revocation of that particular piece of le gislation that wou ld be another kettle of fish, but ju st cosmetics. I like the attitude of the government because it will get thr ough to the people. The Mem ber for lnkster was out, I wanted to tell you that I already got my one. I got my one -(I nter ject ion)- a :ons ervative.

She was candid with me; she voted Con servat ive. She's going to vote for us ne xt time. I really enj oyed the Minister respo nsible for the environm ent in his response to the former Vlinister of Agr iculture's qu estion about the causal relationsh ips between ... was it Left Angle Farm Jr Right Angle Farm or some thin g is polluting the stream? Righ t Angle. 309 d s p I C M o

Friday, December 2, 1977 One of the first jobs I had when I got out of univer sity was to test the ef fluent from a pulp mill flowing into a stream and when the sam ple exceeded the biological demands of the river it would kill every fish with in miles. The sample s used to dis appear and one day I asked, "Whatever happens to these samples?" "Oh, you jus t do n't worry about that. That isn't your job.

You ju st test it and you put down the figures and the whole thing disappears." This particular pulp mill, they grew grapes in this whole area but they put a pulp mill ther e and within thr ee years every grape within a mile and a half was dead. And the farmers went to the company and said, "You know our grapes died ." "But we didn 't do it." You' ve got to prove causal relationships. Did you ever try to prove anything in causal relationshi ps? You know we had grapes her e and they were growing nicely and you came and built a plant and every grape dies. You mu st have done it. Did you ever try and prove that?

A MEMBER: The grapes of wrath. MR. BOYCE: The grapes of wrath it was. But going back down there I noticed the people in the communi ty have finally forced them into putting two in-line ... pre cipitators. Now they're growing grapes again, but nevertheless the company finally had to rectify the situation. But it was intere st ing to hear the tone of the mem ber's speech, Mr . Speaker. I wish him well in his job. It's a difficult post that he has. I wish the Min ister of Educ ation wel l. I was glad to see that they'r e continuing with that program outin Brandon.

That the arrangemen ts that they made with the federal government to cost-share on the staff development for correc tional officers and the rest of it. I think that that should go ahead and I th ink that once you get all the det ails that are coming onto your desk I think that you might even pers onally be enthus iastic about the thrust in that particular area. Mr . Speaker, I would rather be over ther e than here, I would - in government with the rest of these guys.

One It was the best jo b I ever had. of the th ings that I tried to do is that I tried to get a group of people together that wanted to be involved in that particular area and I think we were very success fu l. I am very glad that the staff who were there - I have stayed away from ever y one of them entirely because they're a very conscientious bunch and they're profess ional people - and I get the fe elin g, I get the under stand ing, that they'r e making the kind of com mitment as professi onal people to the present government to see that they do a good jo b for them as they did tor us.

Some people have said that the civil service doesn' t produce very much. A MEMBER: Who said it? MR. BOYCE: Wel l, this is the indication by some people. But I think that you' ll find that in the field of correct ions and deal ing with young pe ople that the staff who have been gathered together in Manitoba is one of the best in the count ry and that the programs that they have initiated, that if you choose to continue them until such time as they get the full test, that you will see that what I say is true, that they are re ally one of the best staffs involved profes sionally in the countr y. I said, Mr.

Speaker, that I was going to be brief and I see that the Leader of the Opposition is back so we' ll have more to say hope fully in the re gular session on some of these bills on other matters. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able First Minister. MR. LYON: Mr . Speaker, I rise with some enjoyment to participate in the last stages of this deba te on the amendmen t moved by my friend the Honour able the Leader of the Op pos ition.

I do so after having heard at le ast a part of some of the dis cussions that have taken place over the last week on the Throne Speech, some of which I will be alluding to in the course of my remarks. I am not, of cou rse, unmi ndful of the fact that this is the first time that I am speak ing from this particular chair, although of cou rse not the first time that I am speaking from this side of the Hous e. And I can repor t to my friend the Member for ln kster, the House Leader for the Opp osition, that it's pleasant to be back on this side of the House.

I only spent a year or so on that side of the Hous e. his record has been that he has been over here longer than over there and that it's not only the air a little better over here but the challen ges are greater, although he seems to be fitting in extremely we ll to hiswhat I hope will be longtime and customar y role as one of the chie f antagonis ts of the government. May I first of all, Mr. Speaker, cong ratulate you on you r elevation to the highe st office that this House has to bestow upon any of its members.

You, Sir, I am su re, are ju st as mindful of your role as a fair and eq uitable arbiter of the deba tes in this Cham ber as are the most experienced member s of this Hous e. I have no hesita tion in saying at all - and I'm sur e it's borne out now on all side s of the Hous e - that I have comple te confidenc e that you will live up to the highest and to the best traditions of you r role as peaker.

Your deportment, your rulings thus far bear out our faith in you andyour abilities and we're sur e that you wil I be able to gu ide the debates and the discussions in this Chamber with fairness toward all and with partiality to none. I wou ld also, Mr . Speaker, like to cong ratulate the mover and the seconder to the Speech rom the Throne, the Honour able the Me mb er for Pembina and the Honour able the Memb erf or St. Matthews, two of the youn gest mem bers that we have on this side of the Hou se.

I took great personal pride in the speeches that both of these young men made but, ore importantly, I take greater pride in their presence in this House. I think that both are going to have a long and productive lives of service to 310

Friday, December 2, 1977 their constituents and to thei r province, and I th ink that the manner in which they started off their leg islative careers - that is the formal part here in the legisla tur e - is some thing that all embers around the House can be proud of. I supp ose I can be forgiven a bit of sub jective and personal pride in the fact that their com petence, their ability as displa yed in their remarks to the House, ind icates, as the Honour able Me mber for Radisson would say, some of the best that we have in the backfield. And there is lots more depth in the backfiel d.

I'm equally proud of my colleag ueon the frontench , the second row and the third row, and even those who have spi lled over onto the opposition side because of lack of seats on this side. That's a good type of a spi llover to have and I feel rather confident that after the next elec tion there will probably be a few more sitting on that side of the House as a spil lover from this side of the House. But more importantly is the fact that as I looked at the list of mem bers who had been elected, there are a numb er of us, includin g the person now speak ing, who are shal l we say longer term members of the Hous e.

But I took some joy from the fact as wel l, Mr . Speaker, that there are 17 by my count, 17 new mem bers of the Hou se, 14 of them re siding on this side of the Cham ber to the right of Mr . Speaker, and th ree of them with in the ranks of the Official Op position.

I wish particularly to congr atulate the new mem bers of the Hous e - all 17 of them -f or, first of all, their comm itment to public service - because it is a comm itment, secon dl y, their com mitment to their own constituencies because they had to bear the su pport, or they had to find and to cultivate and to gener ate and to receive the supp ort of the majority of their constituents before they could be in this Ho use; and thirdly, to wish them some measure of success and some measure of enjoyment, but particularly satisfaction from the kind of service that they can give to the peo ple of Man itoba, whether they sit on the government side or the opposition side.

Because it is no disgrace, as the Honour able the Me mb er for lnk ster can tell you and indeed the Me m ber for St. Bon iface, it is no disg race; in fact it is part of the system that govern ments change from time to time, that's how the parliame ntary system best works, so that there is alternation between two confl icting ide as or two conflicting philosophies, that is quite proper.

I say to my honour able friends across the way that the government has changed and that is not the end of the world for the N DP, and they know that - may I say it is not the end of the world for the NDP any more that it in 19 69 heralded in what some of them thought was going to be the Ne w Je rusalem. That did n't happen either .

I say equal ly to my colle agues in the Prog ressive Cons er vative Party that we have a fund amental resp onsibil ity which has now been placed up on us after being in opposition for some eigh t years, to bring forward those policies, to ad minis ter the affairs of the people of Manitoba in a way that is consis tent with the mandate that we have received from the people of Manitoba. We're not always going to find agreement with our honour able friends opposite; in fact I'd be very su rprised if we did. I think that, as has been said earl ier this afternoon by the Honour able the Member for St.

James, it is out of that conflict of ideas, it is out of that adversarial parliament ary system that the kind of parliamentar y democr acy that we still enjoy, not only in this province but in this coun try and indeed in the dim inishing numb er of countries in the Western World - it is out of that kind of confrontation sometimes hot and heavy, sometimes done in a mor e civilized way, but none thele ss it is out of that kind of adversarial relationsh ip that good government can emer ge. A good oppo sition can make a gove rnmen t a better government.

I look upon my honour able friends opposite, many of whom I know as good opposition critics, some of whom I know as good workers in the govern ment, and I look upon them to help us. Thr ough their criticism, and I hope it'll be mostly constructive, I look upon them to help us provide good government for Manitoba and to te ll us when we're not providing it, accord ing to their lights and I'm sur e they will because that's their job. I mus t say as an aside, Mr.

Speaker, that I've always felt having the respect I do for my colle agues opposite us in this Hous e, I've always felt that mem bers of the New Democr atic Party were mor e at home in opposition than they ever were in govern ment in any case. I think that they rea lly feel more at home. They have never been in office feder ally in Canada and the prospects for it look pretty dim down the next twenty or twenty-five years as wel l, bu t they have fulfil led even with as few as eigh t or nine mem bers, they've always fulfilled a fu nctioning role in the parliament of Canada even thoug h the ir num bers are small.

I think today they're what, only sixteen members of the federal New Democra tic Party in the Ho use of Commons, sixteen out of two hundr ed and sixty four, but they have a role to play and it's a role that contributes to the ability of parliament to fu nction in a democratic fashion. So I say to my honour able friends opposite, don't be too dis grun tled as I know some mus t feel about being in oppo sition.

That's part of the job of being in parliament, part of democr acy, anymore than we shoul d feel too terribly ela ted (although we might be permit ted a tittle bit of ela tion after October 11 , but for not too long a period ) anymore than we should feel too ela ted over the factthat we are now in government charged with those respo nsibilities which only five weeks ago my honour able friends had under thei r domai n. So I think all of us can take pride in the fact that the democ ratic system still fu nctions in a free and unfettered way in the province of Manitoba.

We hope it will continue thus for gen erations, centu ries indeed, to come, but we have to watch it and gu ard it vigilantly to make sur e that it continues to be res ponsive to what the wishes of the people of this province are. Mr . Speaker, I cou ld n't close this initial part of my remarks without saying to my nour able friends opposite that over the next four years while they are in oppositi on, I hope that they can regroup themselves. We hear constant rumour s of cour se about leader ship changes, but that's with in thei r province, not within our s.

But I do hope very sincerely that they can refresh their spi rits because I 31 1 o t p

Friday, December 2, 1977 know that eight years in gove rnm ent has its toll because those particu larly on the Treasury Benc h worked very very hard. I know that because I know my honour able friends across the way worked very hard and I know that my colle agues on the Treasury Bench and in the caucus her e, are working very hard in government. So over the next four years I hope they can refresh their spir its as they are freed up from admin istrative resp onsi bilities, restore their humour and their good will. Ther e's been a little bit of erosion in that and we hope it will come back.

An d as somebody else, I belie ve itwas the Mem ber for St. James, said this afternoon, perhaps there can be more of that camarader ie that used to exis t in this House in previous years when many of us were here in different capacities, albeit mor e of the true camaraderie that I think should exist among le gislators. All of us from time to time, the present speaker included (by speaker, I mean myself, Sir, not you) all of us from time to time contribute to jibes and jests that occasionally we would feel better if we hadn't said. All of us do that. But I think that the 'give and take' of parliament is important.

The he ckling is important. Ther e's no better heckler in the Ho use than the Memb er for St. Bon iface, the Mem ber for ln kster and I hope they 'll keep it up, because th at's part of the spirit of parliament too. But after we leave the Hou se, then I hope that we could leave the Hous e as friends, un ited in the common desire even though we look upon it thr ough different eyes or different lights, un ited in the common de sire that we want to serve the people of Man itoba.

And whil e we 'll have our differences in here, those differences should not reflect up on the re lationship that exists man to man, or woman to woman, in our common jobs as representatives of the pe ople. It is in that spirit, Mr . Speaker, that I would be remiss if I did not say to the Leader of the Opp osition how much I bel ieve per sonally - and I know I speak for the pe ople of Manitoba when I say this - he deserves the thanks and the respect of all of the pe ople of Manitoba for the service that he performed over the last eight years as the First Minister of this province.

To him and to his family, and I've said this before, they have noth ing but the best of will, I know, from all people in Manitoba. Partisan differences are one thing, but in terms of respect for the person who has filled that job, even though we have disag reed from time to time , disag reed fu ndame ntally with what he was doin g, the person has filled the job, the man has filled the job in an honour able way and he deserves the respect and has the respect, I know, of the people of Manitoba for that. And that is said, Mr .

Speaker , any implication be left, without in any way dis cou nting the fact that he may still asp ire to come back to this side of the Hous e, not withstanding some of the state ments that he has made. Bu t eight years as Premier of Manitoba is an outsta nding record, I think, for any man or woman to have fulfille d and we pay him that tribute and we wish him we ll, not only in his present job as Leader of the Op position but ... R. SPEAKER: Order ple ase.

I'm sur e the First Minister does not mind me interrupting his speech to welcome to our Cham bers a gentlema n who has graced our Cham bers before, the Right Honour able John G. Die fenbaker. The Honour able First Min ister. HON. STERLING LYON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can't think of a better way in which to be interru pted than by the presence in our Chamber at this moment of one of Canada's greatest parliamentarians, and a man who I am sur e would have echoed the words that I was ju st speak ing about the parliamen tary process and who, may I say, is a living exam ple of the continuation of that process and of the kind of contribut ion that that process has made to the maintenance of democ racy in our parliamen tary system in this coun try. So we are pleased and privileged to have the Right Hou nour able gentlema n with us this afternoon.

I'm only sorry that he will have to bear through a few comments that perhaps will be a little strange to him in terms of the fact that he has not been ar ound to hear the deba te that was going on for the last several days. We welcome him in our mids t. Mr.

Speaker, there are three points to the amendment that was moved by the Leader of the Opposi tion when he first spoke on this Motion the other day dealing with the qu estion of the Marital Proper ty Act, de aling with the qu estion of taxation, the Su ccession Duty Act, and de aling as well with the statement that we are increasing the relative bu rden of taxation on lower income groups by providing tax relief etc. to those who have greater ability to pay.

He did as wel l, in paragraph two, mention creating undue incent ives to Man itoba emplo yers to utilize over time hour s at the expense of nu mb ers of unemplo yed persons, potentially empl oyable. In effect what my honour able friend has pu rported to deal with in his amendment, or pur ported to say, is first of all he agrees with the legisla tion to put Manitoba back un der the Anti-Inflation leg islation, legislation which I, in its introd uction, pointed out was before my honou rable friends .

It cou ld have been brought in by them in 19 76 and which in turn, because of the Su preme Cour t case, has trigger ed this session because the fai lur e to bring it into force and effect at the present time could have an impact on the publi c pur se of something to the effect of $50 million, aside altogether from the inequ ities that would be created as between the public and the pri vate sectors in Manitoba. So I was naturally expectant that the Leader of the Opp osition would suppor t this legis lation and that is what he has told me.

You then, can imagine my amazement Sir, on hearing the other day that two or possibly th ree of the mem bers of the opposition are not going to follow the lead of the Leader of the Op position with respect to legisla tion that one would have though t would have had un animous suppor t on all sides of the House. I merely say to those mem bers that if they do not su pport the leg islation now, what was their position when the government brought it in by way of Order-in Council?

Why did we not hear from them then, standing up and saying, "This government of ours has passed an Order-in-Council with which we disagree?" We did n't hear any such ringing tones or terms from them atthatt ime but now that they are safely 31 2

Friday, December 2, 1977 ensconced on the opposition side , now when they have no resp ons ibility except to criticize, now they are bravely stand ing up and saying, "We ll, we did a bad job of it; we didn 't bring it in the right way but because the Tories are bringing it in, we're going to try to sweep up a little bit of political favour into our corner. Won't this or that u ion think we are pretty good fel lows if we vote against this bill thatthe Tories are bringing in." Well you know that kind of hypocrisy, Mr . Speaker, ju st doesn't wash.

I think that the Leader of the Opposition was quite right when he said there was no alternative for him and for the memb ers of his group , but to su pport this legisla tion because it is merely a continuation of a pol icy that was brought in by my honour able friends with the su pport of the then oppo sition. And I find it ironic that this kind of oddb all - if I may use that expr ession - odd ball kind of negativism, is arising now, pos sibly only for the reasons that I have sugge sted, and I hope that the motivations for the objec tions are higher than what I have sugg ested.

I rem ind my hon our able friends opposite, Mr . Speaker, that wh ereas the Leader of the Op position pointed out in his amend ment to the thro ne spee ch. Here were his exact words: "This House expresses its regret that the government has, with one except ion that has time urgenc y, given a first priority to five measures that will," and then goes on. This matter has time urgency. I bel ieve that the mem bers of the oppos ition are aware of the fact, Mr.

Speaker , that while we have been dr oning away this week on a throne speech de bate, the city of Winnipeg has sent to the Minister of Urban Affairs a letter which was shown to the Leader of the Op position, indicating that unle ss this bill was passed , the AIB Bill, was passed by the 4th of December , that conside rable difficulty, if not emba rrassment, financially could result to the city of Winnipeg by virtue of the fact that they would have to issue cheques on that date. Now the Min ister of Urban Affairs is in the position where he could, of course, give no gu arantee to the city of Winnipeg.

And I'm not saying that the city of Winnipeg or any outside organization shou ld be able to impress false time limits on this House or any other parliament, but ut I say that when the House is convened for the prim ary pu rpose of passing a pie ce of le gislation which has some time urgency to it, then instead of twen ty-three mem bers dr oning away on a throne speech which is fine and dandy, but sett ing a new precedent in terms of special sess ions in this Hous e, the honour able membeis opposite have to accept some respo nsibility along with the mem bers of the gover nm ent if that le gislation is not passed in time to meet the requ ests of at least one other publ ic group in this province.

I say that not so mu ch by way of criticism as I say it by way of fact, that when I pointed out at the be ginning of this sess ion the precedent that the government was following with respect to a short sess ion was a precedent from the 19 61 sess ion where there was agreement that the throne speech would be foreshortened in order that the House could get on with the busi ness for which it had been called. I know that on Monda y next we are going to be finishing, maybe perhaps even soon er, finishing the throne speech.

But, at the same time , I think that notwiths tanding the pious protestat ions of un dersta nding time urgency with respect to the AIB leg islation, and its impact on the public sector in Manitoba, my honou rable friends opposite have not give n, shall we say, that degree of urgency to the so-calle d urgent matter that is st ill before us, and which has still not had second read ing.

So perhaps next week, when this deba te is concluded, we can re ally get down to busi ness, and displa y to the people of Manitoba the fact that we are able to accomplish public busi ness in a somewhat speedier man ner than has manifested thus far.

The leg islation is ne cessary, there is no fundam ental dis agreement about it, and I wou ld hope that there wou ld be agreement on the part of honour able memb ers op posite that we should be able to pass it through its various stages into com mittee, and so on, with the least dela y possible, and with by leave get it through absolutely as qu ickly as pos sibl y, and then if there is deba te on the other matters, fine and dandy, but let's deal with priority matters first. Now some thing has been said, of cou rse, about the bill that is before us to abolish the Success ion Duty and the Gift Tax Act.

My honour able friends opposite, and I don' t know how many of them are aware of th is, could have been read ing from a speech that was given by, I think it was Mr. Levi, one of the oppo sition mem bers from Br itish Columbia who was formerly a member of Mr .

Barrett's cabinet in British Columbia , who when the provincial treasurer of British Columbia annou nced that B.C. was get ting out of the succession du ty and gift tax field last year, made a speech, the tone, the ideology, the philosophy of which has been echoed, re-echoed, and re-echoed again in this Chamb er in the last week dur ing the cou rse of the throne speech, if not on the deba te of the bill itself, which has had lesser attenti on.

But, we expect this ; we expect my honour able friends real ly to put up the party line, but we don' t expect them to be so blind to the fact that the Secession Dty and Gift Tax Act is being removed in Manitoba because it has to be removed in Manitoba if we're going to be com petitive with other provinces in terms of attracting inves tment and keep ing investment capital her e, and because the dom ino effect of having inve stment capital in a province is that more jobs are capable of being created, and that it's good for the private sector and it's good then for the pe ople who live in Manitoba because it creates jobs.

Now, my hono urable friends opp osite, I know, don't bel ieve too mu ch in capital. In fact, the very name of their party, the proper philos ophical name of their party - they're soci alists, and soc ialists really do have a blind eye to the wor king of capital. They find it very di fficult, you know, working in a country like Canada, because of cou rse the private sector and the mixed economy that we have, and I'm willing to admit we have a mixed economy -(1 nterjec tion)- No, I'm not forget ting Das Kapital, I may get around to that later on in the ses sion.

But my honour able friends are blind to this and you know even in dear old Saskatchewan, dear old Socialist Saskatchewan, which has carried the tattered flag of CCF and NOP politics longer than any provincial government, probably, we ll cert ainly 31 3

Friday, December 2, 1977 since the end of the war, because they were ele cted in 1944. I remember, they were el ected in 1944. But in dear old Socialist Saskatchewan, they got rid of the Suc cession Duty and the GiftTax Act, and you never hear my honou rable friends op posite make any criticism about the fact that Saskatchewan got out of it.

But when Manitoba wants to get out of it, then it becomes something th at's going to help the millionaires; it's going to help all of the rich friends of the Tories; it's going to help , you know, all of this small group that classically the Socialists feel any free enter prise party, or any party other than a Socialist is somehow beholden to. -(Inter je ction)- Nonesense. Nonsense. I say to my honour able friends oppo site that they should read what Mr . Smishek said when he introduced the particular measur e in the province of Saskatchewan.

Now, his words were very brief, his words albe it were very brief, but I'm going to read them back to my honourable friend s ju st so they can hear another Socialist talking, introducing precisely the same measure th at's being introduced by this government, and giving a few of his reaso ns, albeit brief. He didn't like doing it but he did it, and he did it in the pu blic inter est, and here's what he said, and I'm qu oting now from page thirty of Hans ard, and this is from the Saskatchewan budge t speech deli vered by Mr. Smishek on March 10, 1977.

That's not too long ago my honour able friends should be up to date on that. Mr . Smishek said, in Saskatchewan introd ucing precisely the same bill that is before this legisla ture today, but of cou rse it was being introduced by a Socialist, so I know that makes a difference: "M r. Speaker, Saskatchewan has had a long history in the succession duty and gift tax fields. When the federal government abandoned the national taxation of wealth through estate and gift taxes in 1972, Saskatchewan introduced a su ccession du ty and gift tax because we believe that a tax on wealth is a fair tax.

The de cision by the federal government to stop collecting these taxes on behalf of the provinces at the end of 197 4 led the Atlantic provinces to elimi nate these taxes." I he sitate to interject, Mr. Speaker, that I sugge st there was something more than jus t the failure of the federal government tocollect them that caused the Atlantic provinces to eliminate. But carrying on with Mr.

Smishek 's qu ote: "In Janu ary of this year, the government of British Columb ia annou nced its decision to discont inue its suc cession du ty and gift tax, leaving only four provinces that continue to levy these taxes, and among these four Qu ebec has been phasing out of its tax. Su ccession du ties and gift taxes have been a sour ce of great concern to farmers and small bus iness owners in Saskatchewan. In spite of the fact that less than th ree percent of estates in Saskatchewan are subject to tax, there is a widespread opinion that the successors of the average citizen will be su bject to the tax.

The refore, I wish to inform you that successio dut ies and gift taxes will be elimi nated in Saskatchewan effective Janua ry 1, 19 77." Now, as I say, Mr. Smish ek was perhaps not as overblown as one would wish in the introduc tion of a measure which allows the people of his province to keep some of their own mone y. Not as overblown but at least he introduced it, he passed it, because he realized the realities of life, in his province, as indeed we realize them in our province and in Canada as we ll.

Un til the government changed on the 24th of October of this year, Manitoba had the most penal succession duty act in Canada, and that was perpetu ated by my honour able friends op posite on purely ideological ground s, merely because they wou ld n't listen to the pe ople of Manitoba.

They would n't, as the Minister of Publi c Works said the other night, they would n't go out to rural Manitoba and listen to the farmer s say: "Look, I've worked this farm for myself, and my father before me, and his father before him worked the farm, and got it into the state that it's in today, and you now are presuming to come along and tel l me that when I die you're going to take what we have worked over four or five gen erations for?" That's what the farmers of Manitoba were saying. Why did my honour able friends not listen to them?

That's what the smal l bus iness people in Manitoba - who provide about sixty to seventy percent of the jobs in Manitoba - that's what they were saying - the florists, the corner grocers, the small hardware oper ators - not the International Nickles, not the Hu dson Bay Com pany, or any of those people, the smal l people who would have made an investment of capital and sweat and who said: "What right have you, Mr. NOP government to come along with the toug htest tax laws in the land?" And you know what hundr eds of them did, and the Minister of Ind ustr y and Com merce pointed this out the other day.

Tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars le ft this province. Left this province. My honour able frie nds knew it, we knew it, all the accountants in Manitoba knew it, the lawyers knew it and so on. Left this province, so that my honou rable friends opp osite cou ld wallow in their ideological bath of making sur e that the y were still taxing capital in Manitoba. Wel l, that is why it's brou gh t in at this session, because it was contrary to the publi c inter est in Manitoba to maintain it. And I'll say it with a lot more gu sto than Mr . Smishek.

It was working a prejudice to the future development of this province, and of future jo bs for young people. While my honour able friends wallowed in their ideological nons ense, they were cutting out jobs in Manitoba, and th at's why we're repealing it here in in Manitoba in this session, because it's been in far too long, and that's why Saskatchewan, with a gover nm ent of the same political stripe as my honour able friends opp osite, got rid of it because they at least, they at least were once able to put the pu blic interest ahead of their own ideology, and they did, and they're to be cong ratulated for it.

I reg ret that my honou rable friends did n't have that kind of priorization within their government when they sat on this side of the House. So if my honour able frie nds want to continue to wallow in the speeches of Mr . Levi out in British Columb ia, and they want to keep repeating that this tax is only going to help the few millionaires in Manitoba and so on, they can keep on with that nonsense all they want.

But I tell you that there are thousands of people thr ougho ut the length and breath of Manitoba, more particularly in the farm com mu nities, and the farm commu nities still piovide the greatest segment of our wealth in this province. Let nobody ever forget that fact, that agriculture is the base of this province. My honour able 314

Friday, December 2, 19 77 friends learned on the 11 th of October that you turn your back on that segment of our population at your own risk. And they did, in their years in gove rnm ent, they turned their backs on the agricu ltural commun ities of Man itoba, just as they turned their backs on the citizens of Winnip eg when they forced onto them a semi-u nworkable form of govern ment too soon, too qu ick, always manif esting, you knC?w, one of t.he great problems of the Socialist.

He wants to do everything yesterday, it doesn't matter 1f he does 1t well, as long as he does it, because he kn ows he's not going to be in office too terribly long and he wants to get it done yesterday. - And we see that in the marital property law.

We see that in the city of Winnip eg legislation, whi ch aft.er four years of stumbling along with the city of Winnip eg are now coming to us saying, and we've said to them: "We're prepared to sit down and work with you and develop a workable piece of legislation." We' re not in terested in provid in g some kin d of a monu ment to the Conser vative party in Man itoba, we're in terested in giving the city of Winnip eg, in cons ultation with them, a piece of legislation for that city that will work for the benefit of the people.

My honour able friends like to go around buildin g legislative monu ments, particularly before elections. And tha t's why we had the marital property legislation pushed through the House in the last session. And my honour able friends opposite, you know, Mr . Speaker, they say, we have no manda te to bring in the bill, and the bill all it says, it's clear on the face of it, all the bill says is that the legislation is going to be postponed. The legislation doesn't come in to effect until the first of Ja n uary.

When we were sitting on that side of the Ho use, just a matter of a few months ago, my colleague the Min ister of Health, the Memb er for St. Ja mes, at that time, now the Minis ter withou t Portfolio, all of us said you are rush ing it through too qu ickly, you don't know what you are doing. You don't know what you are doing, and they didn 't know wha t they were doing. -(I nterject ion)- The Memb er for Sturgeon Creek. They didn 't know wha t they were doing, and the other memb ers on the comm ittee who worked with the then Attorney -General and so on, kept telling them you are rushing this throug h.

I use the expression, I use it in this House because I don't regard it as a vulgar expression, it is a legislative dog's breakfast in its present form. If that legislation had been brought in, had been allowed to come in to force in effect on the lst of Jan uary, I say today, as I have said sitting from my place across the way only a few months ago, I guaranteed the then Attorney -General it would incr ease the business of every lawyer in Man itoba by at least 25 percent, because it was fraugh t, and still is fraugh t with litigious poin ts that should be made clear.

But they would not listen, they would not listen when other lawyers came before the commit tee. One of them, a well-k nown lawyer in Winnip eg who has worked for my honour able friends opposite in a legal capacity, he's a com petent man who has worked for them for many years, and he came before the comm ittee - you remember him - one nigh t, and he said, "I am crazy to be here." He said, "I should be sitting at home.

But I am here to tell you not to pass this legislation in its present form because all it is going to do is cause a tremendous amoun t of disruption in the lives of indi vidual people, which are going to cause lawyers and accountants to make a dickens of a lot of money before you get around to amend in g it." He said that before the commit tee, and others followed and said the same thing, and on the 15th of October of this year, Mr. Speaker, there was a meeting, the largest meeting of its kind, held in Mani toba. Over 500 lawyers atten ded a Work Sem ina r on the Ma rital Proper ty Law.

I heard from leading memb ers of the bench who were at that meeting - I was not at the meeting - that that group could not come to any resolution wh atsoever as to major points of in terpretation of the law, as to how they could advise thei r clients. -(I nterjec tion) - So my honour able friend says, what about Monda y nigh t? I am tellin g my honour able friends some facts. If my honour able friend wants to con tinue to wallow in his self-ins pired groups, that is his business.

Buts I am merely telling my honour able friend some of the facts of life from people who have read the law and who know somethin g about it and who are charged primarily with the responsibil ity of advising the people of Man itoba. They, and the account ants in Man itoba, can't tell you what that law means and that is why it has to be postponed in the public in terest for a few months in order that it can be cleaned up. That was another legislative icon that my honour able friends opposite wanted to leave on their record.

All all we are saying is you can have all the credit for your legislative icon, but as usual Cons ervatives com ing in to government after Socialists, we've got to clean it up a bit so it will be workable, and that is all we are going to do. I leave this thought with my honour able friends on this point. We have the option, it was not one that was even consi dered .

We have the option, we could have let that law come in to force and effect respon ding now particularly to the Member for Elmwood -w e could have let the law come in to force and effect on the lst of January and I would gua rantee him, that had we done that there would have been a delegation on the front steps and the front lawn and Me morial Park next Ma rch or April or May, when the full force and effect of this law was being felt by the people of Man itoba, demand ing us to make the changes that we are merely taking time to make right now.

I merely say that we can take all of slings and arrows that my honour able friends want to throw across the way, a II of the questions about whether the law will ever be seen again. The Me mber for Winn ipeg Centr e just made some rather ridiculous comment about that. We will in deed take the slin gs and arrows from the different action groups whom I think believe hone stly that the present law is perfect. Well, my honour able friend the Member for l:ik ster could tell them no law is perfect and so could the Memb er for Seven Oaks. No law is perfect.

But t here are laws that are too imperfect to be brought in to force and effect at the present time, so we chose wha t we think was the responsible option. The responsible option was to delay it for a few more months, to clean it up, to let the comm ittee look at it, to hear further briefs and representat ions on it and my honour able friends say we have no manda te for that? Tha t's exactly wha t we sai d across the Ho use only seven or eigh t months ago. 315

Friday, December 2, 1977 Always said that, that the law was being brought in too qu ickly. If my honour able friends, particularly the Attorney-G ener al, if he will cast back in to his min d I am sure he will find that he was receiving the same kind of advice from his in -Hous e advisors at that time.

The former Attorney -General I am sure we will find out that he was receiving that same kind of advice at that time , but of course we did not hear about that advice any more than we heard about the in come tax advice tha t he comm issioned at that time and I haven't even talked about in come tax implications of the law. I am merely saying it has to be cleaned up, it has to be co-ord ina ted _w ith the tax law of the c�untry so that when it is brought in to force and effect it can be brought in to force and effect without husbands' wives having to trip off to lawyers, accountants, legal aid and so on.

With a law that is brought in properly they won't have to do it. May I say, Mr. Speaker, the law that .will be �r<?ught in the next session �f �he Hou�e �o be.debated will not be a perfect law, it will have mistakes in 1t as well. We are not claimin g that 1t 1s going to be perfection at all. It will be I hope a little bit closer to perfection, tha t's all. It 's still going to h!3-ve i�s pitfalls. I know the Memb er for ln kster would b� the last one to sugg� st that anx govern�ent bnngs in a perfect law.

I am merely suggesting that this one was brought in too hastily and with too many layers of amend ments on it to be in telligible to the average citizen in Man itoba - particularly to those professional people who have to in terpret the law for the average citizen of Man itoba - wha t we are attempting to do is to clean up the job.

Now I am going to make this point before I leave the sub ject because somebody across the way, and I forget who it was, was trying to imply that the government was castigating in some way or other the legislative draftsman, particularly_ the sen ior leQis lative cou_nsel of th i_s c�amb er. Well, Mr . Speaker, I th ink that such a silly allegation hard ly requir es any denial. The leg1slat1ve draftman does what he is told by the min isters to whom he reports. Any criticisms we have made of the form and the substance of that law relate to the front bench of the former government, not to the legislative draftsman.

The legislative draftsman takes his ins tructions from the treasury bench and from the government, so I know I need not make that distinction for the Attorney-eneral or G/ for the former Attorney -General or the . Member for lnk ster But apparently somebody on the other side thought that we were criticizing the Civil Service in that regard. No criticism at all. Mr . Speaker, there are any number of items that have been dealt with in the course of the Th rone Speecb debate that we have had. We have dealt with some of the questions relating to Marital Property Law in the course of these remarks.

My honour able friends opposite however have been very very qu iet about another docum ent. I haven't inde ed heard them mention it once. They have been very qu iet about the documen t that was mai led out to them just a matter of a week or so before the House came into session. That docum ent is cal led the Report showing the in terim audited financial data for the six mont hs ended September 30, 1977, and projections for the year ending March 31, 1978. I wonder why it is that we haven't heard too much about that. -(I nter jection)- The Honour able Memb er for Seven Oaks spoke on it?

I am glad that he did because I am sorry I missed his speech because I know that my honour able friend is a knowledgeable man and I look forward to read in g his speech in Ha nsard. But we have had all of the other talk durin g the session about what terrible people the Conser vatives are for delaying the marital law , not delaying, scuttling, tha t's wha t the word was, we are scuttling, and how it's terri ble that we are helping all of our friends, the millionair e friends and so on, with respect to the Succession Duty Act, in precisely the same way that Mr .

Blakene y did, and all of this nonsense that has been going on. we haven't heard too much about the kind of inh eritance that the NOP left, not only the government of Man itoba, but the people of Man itoba, and how we are going to work our way out of this kind of inh eritance. Now if the opposition were really doing its job, Mr . Speaker, I would like some real concr ete help from such mem bers as the Memb er for Seven Oaks, the Memb er for ln kster, because I th ink they were among two of the most com petent mem bers of the former government, and I think they still have good ideas. May I say, Mr .

Speaker, that we welcome their ideas either given in side this House or outside the House, privately or at any time , because they are two gentlemen of com petence who I am sure at many times in their former duties had to ring their hands in despa ir at what they saw going on. But here is the end result, for just this year, for just th is year, and I would really like thei r advice now as to how we and the people of Man itoba start working ourselves back to a situation where we 316

Friday, December 2, 1977 are not contributing, by virtue of large deficits and so on, to the increa sing inflation in Canada, because that's what the cu rrent deficit of $129 mill ion means. You add that up - and we are a sma,11 province - and I know they are going to talk about look at B. C. and look at Ontario and they are both bigger and richer, but on a per capita basis I say to my honour able friend from St. Vital, on a per capita basis the deficit in Manitoba is greater than the de ficit in Ontario, this year.

Now there are some other facts and figures in here - and we could go through this page by page - but I know that hardly anyone across the way mentio ned the fact nobody .dealt with. the debt in Manitoba. Nobody dealt with the debt in Man itoba. You'd think that in addition to the deficit that honour able members opposite wou ld be interested in the heritage that they left us in the debt.

When we were on the other side of the House, and I always tried to make it clear when I talked about the gross figures of debt, I would talk about the gross direct and indirect and gu aranteed debt, and those were the same figures that we qu oted by my honour able friends . in every prospectus that they had to issue, whether in Canada or in foreign marke ts' and there were the figures for the per capita debt. My honour able friend, the now Leader of the Op position, when he sat on this side of the House tried to allege that I was using wrong figures and so on.

If he had merely said there are net debt figures and there are gross debt figures there would n't have been any argum ent, because there are net debt figures and there are gross debt figures.

But on either count the heritage that has been left to the people of Manitoba by my honou rable friends opposite, is that we now have the second high e st per capita net debt in Canada, and we now have the second highe st gross debt in Canada. - (Interjec tion)- I repeat for the benefit of my hon our able friends when I talk about gross debt, I mean direct debt, indirect debt and gu aranteed debt because that's what gross debt is.

When my honourable frien d, as Min ister of Finance, used to go to the financial consortia in New York, or in Toronto, who looked after the borrowing when he was Min ister of Finance jus t a few weeks ago, they wanted him to talk about gross debt. In fact, they dema nded that he talk about gross debt, and my only objection was that they wou ld talk about gross debt, gross gu aranteed direct, indirect and guaranteed debt to the lend ers in the Un ited States and Switzerland and in Ger many and so on, but they wou ld n't come home to the people of Manitoba and talk about it. That was my objection.

I am not interested in re fighting elec tions or re fighting old battles but I merely say for the record that if my honour able friends will tur n page six. It's not numb ered, but it's page six. In this interim statement, the combi ned direct and gu aranteed net debt, debt net of sinking fund s ... Now, my honourable friends - I'm su bject to correction on th is- but I think, my honour able friends, in their perspectices, never even ded ucted sinking fund s. But the auditor in here has, I think, properly ded ucted the sinking funds.

And last year we weie saying that the gross debt for ever y Manitoban was roug hly $3,400 per head, and we were doing it on the gross basis, without deducti ng the sinking fu nds . On March 31, 19 77, and these are the aud ited figures, and that was when the now Leader of the Opp osition stood up and said I was out by a factor of 1 O, and I'd made it cle ar I was talking about gross debt. But here, what do we find now in the aud ited repor ts of Manitoba?

We find that the gross debt as at March 31 , 19 77 less the sinking funds, is $3, 234,000,353, and that from March 31 , 19 77 to September 30, 19 77, that debt went up approximately $200 million mor e, so that the total gross debt, combi ned debt, less sinking funds again, is about $3,4 34,078,626 as of September 30, 19 77. You work that out on a per capita basis and it comes with a pop ulation of 1, 030,000 people, which is the es timated pop ulation of Man itoba today, it comes to somewher e around $3, 350, I don't have the exact figure with me.

Which I do n't think even my honou rable friend from ln kster would argue with me about in terms of the fact that I was stating it at $3, 400 when I wasn't ded ucting the sinking funds from it, because he wasn't deduc ting them when he sho wed them, as I recal l, in the perspectus. So ju st to get that clearly out of the road once and for all, the debt is here, it is the second highe st debt in Canada, and we've got to make sur e that we're able, that we have the financial capacity within the private sector of this province, to meet the kind of debt payments that we have. The debt payments, Mr.

Speaker, on the direct debt alone have gone up some fifteen mill ions of dol lars ju st in this year, so that we're now paying out some thing like $60 million and that's a ro'gh round figure that I'm taking off the top of my head but it's in the statement - $60 mil lion in carrying charges alone ju st on the inner government debt. Now I'm not saying that things that were done by my honour able friends opposite , many ofthem were not good - of cou rse we agreed with many of them - but I am saying, Mr .

Sp eaker, that it's going to take all of the best ingen uity, all of the best judg ment that we can find in the next four years, to bring this province back again into a competitive position with other provinces, both in terms of taxation and in terms of debt, wh ich have been two of the heri tages that th is previous government left to the people of Manitoba. And two of the heritages by the way, Mr . Speaker, that the people of Manitoba didn 't want. The y talk about a manda te for us to postpone for a few months to cle an up a piece of thei r legis lation.

I ask them whe re was their mandate to give Manitobans the second highest per capita debt of any province in Canada? I ask them where was their manda te? Where was their mandate to have in the cou rse of construction when we came into office this year, facing a $1 29 mill ion deficit, $75 million worth of build ings under construction, the most important of which were what? Parking garages for the government fle et, a new building for Autopac. -(I nterjec tion)- No parking garage? No parking structu re? Wel l, I think my honour able friend had better talk to his colle ague beh ind him.

You know we found out last year there wasn't too much interco nnection between the min isters of the former government; we're ju st finding it out again that my honour able friends left that kind of capital construction program un der way facing, as they knew, the kind of deficit ... and I've only been talking today about the cu rrent deficit, I haven' t even been talking about the capital deficit facing the 31 7

Friday, December 2, 1977 kind of current deficit of $1 29 million that the pe ople of Manitoba have to pay for over the course of the next few years. Wel l, my hono urable friends can com plain all they want, you know, about things that we're doing as being typical of Tory governmen ts and so on, even though the things we do are very simi lar in terms of taxation to what Mr . Blakeney does right next door to us. My honour able friends can com plain all the y wish about that but we're ju st going to carry on and do things according to what we be lieve to be right, and we're not always going to be right.

I can assure my hon our able friends that we're going to make mistakes ju st as they made mis takes because we have no mono poly on wisdom on this side of the House. That's why I reinvite them to help us from time to time because government today is a comp lex busi ness, more comp lex than most peo ple realize, and we need all the help we can get from them and from any group s in Manitoba. But we don' t need blind confrontation. We don't need blind ide ology. What we do need is a little bit mor e listen ing to the peo ple of Manitoba.

I found when I ran in a by-elec tion last year in a constituency calle d Sou ris-Killarney, of which I am very very proud and which now has the Honour able the Minister of Mines and Resou rces as a dist inguis hed member from it, and had our

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-1-11
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 1st hansardpdf 11.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	1a39588a42801b7238f7ae66ca35ca6b36a8ef8a

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