Manitoba Hansard — 19 June 1989 (Sitting 22B, 34th Legislature, 2nd Session)

34-2-22b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, June 19, 1989. The House met at 8 p.m. DEBATE ON SECOND READING BILL NO. 3-THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT Mr. Speaker : Debate on second read ing, on the pro posed motion of the Ho nourable Min ister of Highways and Tr ansportation (Mr . Albert Driedger), Bill No. 3, The Hig hway Tr affic Amendment Act; Loi modifiant le Code de la route, standing in the name of the Honour able Member for The Pas {Mr. Harapiak), who has 29 minutes rem aining. The Honourable Memb er for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis). I Ms . Judy Wa sylyci a-Leis (St. Johns): Thank you, Mr. Speaker- Ho n.

James Dow ney (Mi nis ter of Northern Affair s): Mr . Speaker, on a point of order. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Minister of Northern and Native Affairs (Mr . Downey). Mr. Do w ney: Just a point of order. The Member for St. Johns {Ms. Wasylycia-Leis), is she speaking in place of the Member for The Pas (Mr . Harapiak)? The Member for The Pas is giving up speaking on that? Mr. Speaker: The Honour able Minister does not have a point of order. The Honourable Member for St. Johns. Ms . Wa sylyci a-Leis: Mr .

Speaker , I am very pleased ' to be able to par ticipate in this debate on Bill 3, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act, pleased because it addresses a very critical issue in my mind in terms of the quality of life in our communities and indeed the entir e Province of Manitoba. I am also pleased to participate in a debate that addresses such a timely issue, but a long overdue re sponse. Obviou sly, we are all concerned in this Legislatur e about the crit ical issue of impaired drivi ng.

It is a critical issue, a life-threaten ing issue, a destructive issue in terms of our communities and the health and well-being of all citizens in our province.

I want to be gin my remarks by joining with my colleagues in the New Democratic Party in commending the Govern ment for coming fo rward with these amendments to The Highway Traffic Act, amendments which deal with the critical matters of licence suspension, suspension of vehicle registrat ion, and the licence suspension appeal process, all of which are critical issues to the theme of cracking down on drinking and drivi ng. 710 In addition to off ering my congr atulations to the Government of the Day for bringing forward these amendments, I want to say that we will be pur suing this Bill with a gr eat deal of inter est as it goes through the normal legislative process.

We will be looking forward to very intense input on the part of community members and organiza tions everywhere. *

(2005) As Mem bers know, this is an area which has generated considerable interest and activity on the part of volun teers right across the provi nce. Many organ izations have devoted hours, time, energy and money to address this issue, to bring it forward to the Government of the Day, to bring it to the attention of all legislators with the hope that we will, with the resp onsibility that we assumed in becoming elected to this Cham ber, take up these serious issues and that we will deal with them in a comprehensi ve and seri ous way.

We support the Government for making one step in that dir ection, for addr essing some of the issues pertai ning to drinking and dr iving. Ob viou sly, Mr . Speaker, there are many related issues and outstanding matters pertai ning to drinking and dr iving which must be address ed. We will, in the course of this debate, raise those issues and thr oughout the process continue to raise them and make every effort to listen to the other concerns being raised by Manitobans generally. As I said, all legislators in this Chamber believe drinking and dr iving is a serious issue which must be dealt with urgent ly.

We know the statistics. We know the statistics from our own sources here in Manitoba, the Manitoba Attorney General 's office, Highway and Tr ansportat ion Department and of course the MP IC, all of which demons tr ate that the num bers are astr onomically high when it comes to persons charged with impair ed driving. In 19 86 alone, 7,547 persons were charged with impair ed dr iving offences, and unfor tunately Manitoba ranks seventh in terms of those statistics, in terms of numbers of people charged for drinking and dr iving offences.

What is par ticularly shocking and relevant to this debate, shocking in terms of our overall view of this problem but relevant in terms of the need for imme diate action, legislation and attention , is the incredi ble incr ease in offences per taining to drinking and dr iving that has occurred here in Manitoba in a period of time when the trend was going the other way for the rest of Canada. Manitoba has shown the largest increase in terms of persons charged with impair ed dr iving offences since the year of 19 83.

Ob viously with those kinds of statistics, we need to be much more than concerned about the problem, much more than aware of those statistics. The statistics do not really demonstrate the severity of the problem . The statistics do not real ly tell the emotional trauma. The

Monday, June 19, 1989 statistics do not do justice to the fact there are hordes and hordes of drinking dr ivers on our roads. * (20 10) By a survey, I believe of the Justice Minister's own department again, it would appear that nearly one in every five drivers on the road at night has been drinking, and even more shocking that one in 20 driving at night are actually impaired . That means that you and I in this Legislatur e and indeed Manitobans everywhere face a 50-50 chance of being involved in an accident that is related to the consumption of alcohol.

In fact, probably 100 percent of the population in Manitoba knows someone, either a neighbour, a frie nd, a family member, who has been .involved in an alcohol-related crash. Mr. Speaker, it is time, it is absolutely imperat ive that we deal with this issue on a very urgent basis. If we are serious about dealing with that death toll, cutting down on those statistics I have just cited and others have mentioned during thi.s debate, then obviously there must be tougher penalties. There must be penalties of a natur e included in this legislation. Th ere must of course be a lot more.

There must be a comprehensive appr oach deali ng with educa tion, awareness, preven tion, trea tment, re habilitation, leader ship on the part of the Government in all aspects of this issue. Mr . Speaker, I will ret urn to that theme, as I am sur e Members on the Government benches will know I will do. There is another aspect that must be considered whenever we are dealing with the question of alcohol consumption · and that critical issue of drinking and driving. That is the toll on our society in br oader health related , work-r elated terms. Mr . Speaker, I am sure the Minister of Health (Mr .

Orchard ) who is joining with us in the-'-excuse me, no comments on the presence or absence of Ministers -b ut let me just say that the Minister of Health who is paying such attention to this debate is fully aware of the impact of consumption of alcohol on our health system and on the cost for taxpayers generally when it comes to respo nding to the health-related problems as a re sult of alcohol consumption.

Whether we are talking about alcoholism, psoriasis, poison ing and a whole host of diseases that are attri buted to the consumption of alcohol , the consequences for a bur den on our health care system and a burden on taxpayers everywhere is absolutely glaring. I am sure the Minister of Health (Mr . Orchard) is aware of some of those statistics, is aware of the fact that 17 percent of alcoholics are administered to psychiatric hospitals and the cost to our health care system because of that. I am sure the Justice Minister (Mr.

McCrae) and all Mem bers of the .Gove rnm ent are aware of the rela tionship between alcohol consumption anddomestic violen ce, child abuse and violence in our society generally. Ther e is no shortage of documentation to clearly point to the trem endous cost that our. society must bear as a resu lt of alcohol consumption. I am sure . that the Minister of Industry, . Trade and Tour ism (Mr. Ern st) will. be concerned when he looks 711 up the statistics fou nd again in Government documents.

This one in the report by the Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba shows quite clearly that alcohol use causes industry a loss of at least 25 percent of the trou bled emplo yees' wages in non-produc tive work , that untr eated alcoholic employees are absent two-and-a half times as many days as other employees. Finally, I am sur e all Members of the Gover nment will be concerned with the fact that alcohol abusers filed five times as many compensation claims and used thr ee times more sick leave than any other employees. The statistics go on and on. Now, Mr .

Speaker, as I said at the outset, it is imperat ive for the Government of the Day and indeed all of us in this Legislatur e to address the issues. We have seen a positive response on the part of the Governm ent of the Day.· We have seen some tougher penalties coming forward to crack down on the thr eat, the menace on our roadsides. • (2015 ) � The measures in Bill No. 3 cer tainly are long overdue and much needed.

I think all of us in this Chamber, at least on this side of the Cham ber, are having a little difficulty putting this Bill in the context of the overa ll record of accompl ishment on the part of the Cons ervat ive Government in Manitoba. It obviously, in our mind, is a little difficult to determine how consistent this appr oach is with the number of what I would call very regressiv e actions on the part of the Cons ervativ e Govern ment in dealing with this serious issue. Mr . Speaker , the Minister of Justice (Mr . Mccrae) is now taking some inter est in what I am saying.

I think he appr eciates the words of commendation on the part of the New Democratic Party. I hope he is prepared to listen to some constructive criticism when it comes to dealing with the broader issues involving drinking and driving and some suggestions for other actions and other needed measures to deal with a serious problem, because obviously there is not a soul who would believe that we can solve the serious pro blem of alcohol consumption, which has enormous costs on our society, ii whether thr ough health care costs, whether thr ough , loss in

part icipation in the work force, whether thr ough abuse in the family, battered women, child abuse and so on. There is not a soul in this House, I would hope, who would not know we have to address the broader question of how to prev ent the incidence of alcohol consumption to begin with, or to cut down on the incidence of alcohol consumption, and to pr event the incidence entir ely of drinking and driv ing. We are not going to do it simply by putting in place harsher penalties. We are going to do a bit of the job, we are going to get a little better in terms of the statistics.

We are going to send a clear signal to Manitobans that there are costs to be paid if, one chooses to drink and dri ve, and in the proces s change the attitudes on the part of people. When it comes to this very serious issue, as the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) is no doubt aware, most people .do not view drinking .and driv ing as a

Monday, June 19, 1989 crime. They do not view it as a seri ous issue, an issue that has the potential for killing other people, innocent victims, for maiming citizens who are caught in the middle of an alcohol-related crash. Mr . Speaker , it is absolutely critical that we start to move a little bit beyond this issue and we start to press this Government for some of the actions that have been missing today, and some of the actions which do not fit at all with this legislation.

Let us rem ember that it was this Govern ment who made a huge election pr omise in the last provincial election campaign arou nd this question of dr inking and dr iving. Let us not forget the eight-point program of this Cons er vative Govern ment. Let me refresh the memory of Members of the Cons ervative Government by referring to the April 14 press release entitled: "Filmon Cracks Down on Drunk Driv ers.

" In it he says that impaired dr iving-o f course, we all agree -i s the largest single crim inal cause of death in our province and, as a resu lt, the Con servatives have promis ed an • eight-point strategy that will get at the heart of the • matter arou nd drink ing and dr iving. Now, Mr. Speaker, ther e is an eight-point prog ram and I do not re ally know if any more than one or two of that eight-point program has even been addressed or acted upon. A gr eat fanfare was made by this Government about special licence plates to identify individuals convicted of impaired dr iving offenses.

I do not think I have heard anything, unless I have missed someth ing, I have not heard anything from this Government about that prom ise. I have not heard too much yet about requiring first-time drivers to go thr ough a course, to see fil ms on dr inking and driving, to be educated on the dangers of dr inking and dr iving. I may have missed it, Mr. Speaker, but I have not noticed a new emphasis on that area. I have not seen the introduc tion of photographs on dr iver 's licences to end the practice of suspended dr ivers using other people's licences. *

(2020) Now again, I may have missed something, but I did not pick that one up yet. If the Minister of Justice (Mr . McCrae) has moved, or the Minister of Highways and Tr ansportation (Mr . Albert Driedger) has moved on those issues in a concr ete way, then I would certa inly congratu late them for doing so. I have not seen any movement on this pr ovince of reduced delays in the cour t system by introd ucing video taping of impaired dr ivers and designating the cour t's facilities to specifically hear impair ed dr iving cases.

Yes, I have heard about the last promi se, which was a non-election promise to begin wit h, which was maintaining the ALER T Program. I am pleased to see that the Conser vatives had the astuteness to recognize something good that was in place, and would have expected any political Par ty of the day serious about forming Government to obviously maintain the ALER T Program . So I think that it is certainly not something that was new and innovative. So, Mr. Speaker, we have a set of election promis es that have not been entirely acted on. In fact, it would 712 seem that only a few have actually been acted on.

I would hope that this Govern ment, if it is not pulling another Mulr oney tactic on us, will live up to its prom ises, will not promis e one thing in an election period and turn ar ound and totally deny any re sponsibility, abdicate re sponsibility for implementing on those prom ised actions. So, Mr. Speaker , this Government still has a long way to go before it has met its own obligations, obligations enunciated by its own political Party apparatus, and I would hope that at least it would start by living up fu lly to those promises in short order .

But even mor e seri ous than unf ulfille d ele ction promis es is the critical issue of initiatives undertaken by this Government, not promis ed during an election campaign- keep that in mind, Mr . Speaker -but initiated since coming into office that fly in the face of everything they have said in their press release back in the el ection and everything they have tried to say by introducing this Bill, Bill No. 3. (Mr . Deputy Speaker , William Chornopy ski, in the Chair .) Mr . Deputy Speaker , it does not make sense.

If a Government is serious about cracking down on dr inking and driving, it does not make sense for that Government to turn around and encourage the consumption of liquor to make it easier to drink and dr ive, to make the possibility of a menace on our highways even more of a danger , even more of a threat to our communities and our people in those communities. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I would urge, through this debate and this discussion on Bill No. 3, an attempt on the part of the Government of the Day to ret hink its initiatives to date, its actions taken to date, that fly in the face of its-and I believe its intentions are ser ious.

I believe there is a real interest on the part of Members on the Cons ervative benches to get at the heart of this problem and to actually make some inroads and to start cutting down on the numbers of innocent victims who are kill ed or maimed for life because of carelessness on the part of individuals and a willy-nilly appr oach to dr iving down the road and swigging back a beer or whatever type of alcohol, or fe eling that it is quite in order to simply hop in one's car after dr inking a gr eat deal at a local pub or at a party and not thinking for one second about the serious problems that this will have on someone else's life. *

(2025) As I said, the odds re ally are 50-50 for all of us. The odds are 50-50 of dr iving at night. Tonight, when we driv e home to our constituencies, those of us who are for tunate enough to dr ive home at night from the Legislative Building will face a 50-50 chance of being involved in an alcohol-related crash because someone out there, because hor des of people out ther e are drinking and dr iving.

It is on tha t basis that I real ly fi rmly believe that this Government must move a little further than simply intr oducing a number of harsher penalties that are certainly in order , but it must move in other directio ns as well. I do not unde rstand for one moment how this Govern ment, a few short months ago, felt it quite in

Monday, June 19, 1989 order to introduce changes to The Liquor Control Act to make it possible for adver tisements of wine and beer to take place on our airwaves during the day. I do not understand the ra tionale for that kind of a decision. Mr . Deputy Speaker , let me say I do understand it on the basis of the link s between the Cons ervative Governme nt of Manitoba and indeed of Canada with big business. I do unders tand that ther e is a certai n amount of catering and pandering to those inter ests. I do underst and when I look at the election contri butions' lists.

I do under stand that there is a cer tain need on the part of the Cons ervative Government, and I believe the Liberal Party as well, because they are just as tied into those interests. On the basis of the election contributions' list, one would think even more tied into· those inter ests and probably more committed to listening to the concerns of that par ticular group in our society and acting on the part of those corporate inter ests, whether they be in the liquor industr y or any sector of our economy. So I guess I do understand it a bit, but it does not fit.

It does ncit fit when you look at a Government that is trying to deal seriously with the menace on our roads by intr oducing tougher penalties for The Highway Traff ic Amendment Act but, on the other hand, make it possible for the liquor industry, our beer and wine industries, to advertise willy-nilly at any time of the day or night, regard less of who is watching and no matter what the consequences. Mr .

Deputy Speaker , I think it is only too well documented the impact that kind of advert ising has on gr oups in our society, on individuals in our society, and clearly without a doubt on the incr eased consumption of liquor. So I fail to unders tand how we, on the one hand, can encourage consumption of liquor and, on the other hand, try to crack down on the incidents. It seems to me that it is cancelling the positions out. We are left with the same problem and still nothing is being done to deal seriously with this critical issue.

It is absolutely shocking that this Government would prom ote the advert ising of wine and beer to the extent it has, and not at all be concerned with the impact that it will have par ticularly on the young people in our society. Study after study after study has demonstrated that those advert isements which suggest that if you want to be popular, if you want to be hip, if you want to be· trendy, if you want to be cool, if you ·want to be liked, if you want to be loved , if you want to have frien ds, then you will go out and party and you will b�oze it up all night and day. *

(2030) There is no shor tage of evidence to point to the dir ect correlation between the promotion of drinking as a socially appropriate behaviour and the gr owing concern, the gr owing incidence of drinking among young people. Again I point to the Mi nister's own departm ent's documentation. There is page after page of statistics to show that it is becoming much more of a. serious problem among young people . The incidence of dr inking, of consumption of liquor, of alcohol, of wine and beer, is certainly on the ris e . Mr .

Deputy Speaker , it is clearly on the rise because it has been encouraged as a s bcially appropria te kind of behaviour . It is 713 encouraged thr ough our airwaves on TV, on rad io, through the newspapers and magazines that we read , everywhere you turn, on the billboards, on the bus stops, everywhere. If you want to be popular and you want to be accepted, then you will not hesitate to drink. The re sults in turn and the incr eased potential for drinking and driving is absolutely clear.

To me, it is absolutely crystal clear that the potential for drinkin g and dr iving as a re sult of incr eased consumption is there. You cannot encourage consumption on the one hand and turn arou nd and say that is not causing drinking and driving, and all we have to do is worry about cracking down on those people on the road through amendments to The Highway Traffic Act and we will have dealt with a good part of the problem. The fact of the matter is we will only have dealt with a tiny, tiny, tiny part of the problem. Mr .

Deputy Speake r, I wou ld hope th at the Government is on a new wave, on a new line of thinking, on a new foundation of commitment to dealing with this problem and will be thinking about res cinding the � amendments to The Liquor Control Act that were � brought forward in the last Session. I would hope that the Members of the Liberal Party in this House would have recogn ized the error of their ways by supporting this legislation and recog nize the need to call for the resci nding of that legislation.

I find it just shocking that the Members of the Liberal Par ty can stand up day after day after day and talk about what is important for our communities and our society, what is morally right, what is wholesome and so on, and then turn around and support this Government on advert ising of wine and spir its 24 hour s of the day. Again it is becoming harder and harder to see the diff erence between the Liberals and the Conservat ives.

It is more and more diff icult for Manitobans everywhere to wonder if anyone in these two political Parties is on their side, is on the side of ensuring that innocent victims of alcohol-related crashes are recognized or are spared the kind of menace on the roads that are faced on a day-to-day basis, are spar ed the kind of threat to their own life. The Minister of Health (Mr . Orchard) has said that 4 is nonsense, and I just do not understand how the Minister of Health can say that it is nonsense when the evidence is clear, Mr . Deputy Speaker.

I have just pointed out in stark terms, in Clear unequivocal terms, that this Gove rnment, although it has moved on some reas onable amendments, has clearly made some other major decisions in the contrary dir ection, in the total opposite dir ection. I would be delighted to hear the Minister of Health's ra tionale for those changes when he is dealing or trying to deal with the enormous burden on our health care system as a resu lt of alcoholism, as a resu lt of accidents caused thr ough alcohol-r elated crashes.

Not only have we seen inconsistency in terms of the advert ising of wine and spirits on our airwaves, but we have also seen it when it comes to some of the serious considera tions that this Government is giving to other ways to encourage consumptfon of liquor. The Minister of Justice (Mr . Mccrae) will know quite well the concern that Members of the New Democratic Party have rais ed

Monday, June 19, 1989 with respect to the notion of cred it, of convenience cards being available to make it possible to cash cheques in liquor stores. We are concerned about that precisely, because anything that would possibly increase the consumption, encourage drinking and incr ease the consumption of liquor, creates a greater danger in terms of drinking and driv ing, has a gr eater threat of impair ed driv ers on the road .

I implor e the Government of the Day, before it embarks down this tr eacherous course of encourag ing drinking, and possibly drinking and driv ing, that it will think very seriously before going in that dir ection. I would urge the Minister re sponsible for the Liquor Control Comm ission (Mr . McCr ae) to not act on any of those rec ommendations from the Liquor Control Comm ission, including the convenience card, including the sampling of liquor, including the Sunday opening Sunday opening, an issue that has been raised through the strateg ic plan of the Manitoba Liquor Control Comm ission-a nd the list goes on.

I think we have embarked upon a very, very, dangerous road , a very dangerous course of action for Manitobans if any of those ideas are promo ted. I know the Minister of Justice {Mr. McCrae), at least in Question Peri od, has tried to divert attention from those constructive criticisms by suggesting that these were the same ideas that were presented when the New Democratic Party was in Government.

I think it is very important for the Minister of Justice and all Mem bers of that side to remember that this Govern ment, the New Democratic Party when it was in Govern ment, did not act on those recom mendations, did not move to bring in a convenience card, to bring in sampling in liquor stores and other sign ificant changes that clearly encourage consumption and hence the possibility for drinking and driving. Mr .

Deputy Speaker , I would hope, in the rema ining few minutes of my time, to talk a little bit mor e about the solutions from a positive perspective and offer some construc tive criticism to this Govern ment, as well as some suggestions for dealing with this area in a more comprehens ive way. • It is cert ainly the view of the New Democratic Party • Caucus that one has to act on all fronts at once.

Obviously, we have got to act when it comes to tougher penalties, enforcement of existing laws and serious measures to act as a deterrent to drinking and driv ing, but we have to be equally vigilant in our efforts to address education, prev ention and tr eatment. Without any focus on those areas, without a serious effort to work on those aspects of the problem, then we will be further behind despite the intr oduction of amendments to The Highway Traffic Act. I think it is obviously something that should not come as a surprise to the Minister of Justice (Mr . Mccr ae).

This multifaceted appr oach, the solution to a very serious prob lem, has been documented over and over again, has been brought to his attention and all Mem bers of the Gove rnment by many concerned gr oups. Certai nly I think the brie f by some of the concerned citizens points very clearly to the need to deal with all aspects of the problem. I would ask the Minister of Justice {Mr . Mccrae) and the Minister of 714 Health (Mr . Orchard ), who is obviously quite, I would assume, concerned about this issue, to deal with health and legal prob lems or solutions as if it was a unit in terms of this serious problem.

I would refer very briefly to a publication that all of us are quite familiar with here in the Legislatur e entitled Cr ossroad s, the national newsletter on drinking and dr iving, and refer back to the March issue of 1989, which I think gives some very good suggestions which I hope that the Members of the Government side will be looking into and following up. "Ideally, the criminal justice system and the health care system would function together in dealing with impair ed driv ing.

Most persons convicted of two or mor e impair ed dr iving offences not only have legal problems but they also have drinking problems.

Few jur isdictions, however, ensur e that repeat off enders do not receive their driv er licence back until they handle any serious problems with alcohol. * (2040) "Under the so-called health-legal approach, the criminal justice would still punish off enders, and dr iver licencing agencies would still suspend or revoke their licence upon conviction, but health providers dedicated to tr eating alcohol problems would become much mor e involved thr oughout the process of sentencing and punishment.'' I say to Members of the Legislatur e, to you, Mr .

Deputy Speaker, that in my mind we are missing the second half of that equation. We are missing the serious appr oach pertai ning to the health part of the solution.

We are missing a commitment on the part of this Govern ment to seriously put in place and maintain services that deal with trea tment, that provide treatment for those with a serious addiction problem who are alcoholics, who are suffering diseases from consumption of liquor, who are under emotional, psychological and economic stress and are unable to break that cycle around them, to br eak that cycle of drinking, of suppr essing their press ing probl ems of the day thr ough drink. Until we start to deal with the need to treat that problem, we will not have made a great step forwa rd.

I would implore the Government of the Day to think very seri ously about existing services and to work on impr oving those services, not cutting back on the services. I think that the Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba should not be made to endur e a cutback of any sort, as was evident the other day and certainly rais ed in this House by the New Democratic Party. Any cutback at this time is not in order. If changes in dir ection are re quir ed, if new emphasis is req uir ed, then I am sur e the Government of the Day has the ability to negotiate with the AFM and to ensur e that those changes are forthc oming.

I would also imp lor e this Gov ernment, the Government of the Day, to ensur e that or ganizations like the Women's Post-Treatment Project which does go back to deal with the root of the problem, which does tr y to get at the issues of prevent ion, tr eatment and education, will get the necessary fu nding to keep its door s open. I believe, as I wrap up, that by ensuring

Monday, June 19, 1989 that orga nizations like the Women's Post-Tre atment Project and any other- Mr. De puty Speaker: The Honourable Member's time has expir ed. Ma . Waa ylycia-Leia: -similar efforts in our society will do, will go a long way towards ensuring that this proble m is dealt with in a positive, real istic way. I would urge the Government of the Day to act both on the legal side and pr ovision of gr eater penalties to crack down on the problem of drinking and dr iving, also to ensur e that our health system resp onds in a very seri ous way to the question of pr evention and trea tment. Thank you. Mr.

Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): I am pleased to be able to offer a few comments to this important piece of legislation. I think the comments of my colleagues, and perhaps the suggestions of my colleagues are ones that could be taken to heart . Perhaps some of the suggestions she made will be reflected in the discussion that we have in committee.

I am sure that many of the individuals and gr oups that come forward dur ing the committee stage to make repres entations on this Bill are going to come with similar suggestions, but I am also pr epared to suggest that many of the gr oups who come forward are going to see many shor tcomings in this piece of legislation. One of the challenges of legislators is to impose upon the citizens-im pose is the word I choose to use reaso n able req uir ements for appropria te and respo nsible behaviour and actions. It is never an easy balance.

I know there are going to be those who say that this legislation is repressive, violates in some respects individual rights. Perhaps there are going to be those who argue that cert ain provisions in this Act violate the Char ter of Rights in some respects. Mr . Deputy Speaker , they may be right. We may have occasion at some futu re date to be revie wing this legislation, making perhaps consequential amendments to this legisl ation, to overcome some of the shortc omings that inevitably are part of the dr afting of any piece of legislation.

All in all, I do not think we should let that dissuade us from doing what we would see to be right . I do not think it matters which side of the House you are on, all of us agree the problem that alcohol creates in our society is a crit ical one, a severe one. The problem that it is creating on our highways is mor e than severe, it is tr agic. For edification of Members who may not be aware of the statist ics, and I apolog ize to the Min ister res ponsible, who perhaps when he introduced the Bill outlined some of the statistics when it comes to drinking and dr iving in the Province of Manitoba.

However , I am going to repeat them. In 1986, Mr . Deputy Speaker , Manitoba had a total of 7, 547 per sons char ged with impair ed dr iving offences. The lar gest single off ence was dr iving with over 80 milligrams of alcohol in the blood. That fig ure is staggering to say the least.

If I may be permitted, 715 the leniency of rou nding that figur e off and saying that 10 ,000 Manito bans chose to put thems elves in contraven tion of the Crimi nal Code, ch ose to endanger the lives of themselves and their passengers and any unfor tunate pedestrians, other vehicles that might be in their path, is a staggering figur e.

When you consider, according to the estimates of most police forces in Canada, only one in ten of those who are actually involved in drinking and dr iving come to the attention of police officers, we are talking about 10 0, 000 of f ences in a year with the obvious multiplication exacerbation of the potential for damage and injur y and death, not to mention the human suff ering that goes along with each of those statistics. So, Mr . Deputy Speaker, we are talking about a serious problem.

We have a serious problem partl y because the phenomenon of drinking, the phenomenon of alcohol abuse in our society has become part of the perceived req uir ement of sociability. We, like many other western world countries, have come to depend on alcohol as a stimulant, as a lubricator, if you will, of � social inter action. • There are many, and I suppose if I were to categoriz e myself as one, would say that I am a moderate when it comes to imposition of rigid ru les with respect to the use of alcohol.

However, I believe that with the fre edom to use a dr ug, and alcohol is a drug and let us not kid ourselves, also comes resp onsibility. When you are using a drug with the potential debilitating affects of alcohol, the responsi bility is gr eat. In a society that gives re sponsibility, we have to assume that individuals take responsi bility. For those who do not, there has to be inevitably consequences and that is wher e we come to right now. Mr . Deputy Speaker , this Bill, while it goes much further than previous pieces of legislation in terms of (

a) allowing police officers to do their job, to enforce the laws, and (

b) in req uiring individuals to be resp onsible, then I think that is a good thing. *

(2050) We know that for too long police officers, whether 4 they are municipal or our national police force, have felt that they have lacked the tools necessary to suffi ciently enforce the law, to ensur e that drinking and driving is an offe nce likely to cause incarcerat ion or cause consequences. The drinking and driving laws in the province, the laws that apply consequences to social drink ing, should be enforceable. They should encourage enforcement and they should ensur e that we are not leaving our police for ces without the appropria te and adequate tools to do the job. Mr .

Deputy Speaker , this Bill is much broader than simply dealing with .the question of drinking and driving. The Bill in its fi rst part also deals with the right and the obligations of motorists to respond to the signals of a police officer . It also redefines the powers of a police officer when it comes to dir ecting traffic. Not all of that is germane necessarily to the perceived object of this. Bill, and that is to limit or inhibit drinking and dr iving, but it is nonetheless part of the legislation. It gives the police officer additional power to assert in

Monday, June 19, 1989 circumstances where there is reason to believe that there may be dr inking or other circumstances which are deemed to be possibly jeopard izing human life, proper ty or whatever. Part of the Bill deals with that. The largest single objective of this legisla tion, however, is dealing with the specific problem of drinking and driving, dealing with the consequences of licence suspension and impounding of vehicles. Again as I indicated, there are going to be those who come before committee who are going to try and persuade the Attorne y General (Mr .

Mccrae) and the Minister of Highways and Tran sporta tion (Mr . Albert Driedger) that the legislation goes too far, that it is the heavy hand of Government being laid upon innocent individuals. We have to contemplate what those arguments mean and what likelihood of success those arguments are going to have, because any piece of legislation can be subject to a challenge of one sort or another , either in our own courts or ultimately in some Supreme Court, so we have to be cognizant of the fact that we are dealing more harshly with dr inking driv ers than we have in the past. Mr.

Deputy Speaker , I think the Bill has dr awn a nice balance, and I will explain why in a few minutes, but I want to say that the balance in itself is important. I think any legislation that goes before a higher court on appeal is going to ask the question, does the legislation try and balance the ri ghts of the individual with the rights of the society at large. I think that it has done that. I think, as I said, it gives police mor e power. It applies more res ponsibility to the individual.

The balance, I think, comes in how individuals are dealt with in respect to ownersh ip of the vehicle, with respect to the personal belongings, personal prop erty in an impounded vehicle. It is dealt with in respect to the appeal mechanism, the application that can be made by someone who feels that their vehicle has been wrongly impaired (sic). One of the other interest ing parts of the Bill is the question of assigned re sponsibility.

I do not know whether that word is used in the Bill, but basically it follows on the question of whether an individual who is driving has or does not have the consent of the registered owner of the vehicle, a very tri cky and thorny problem in law because it is almost always a question of interpr etation or a question of judgment about who, involved in the incident, is actually telling the truth. The regis tered owner may say no, he did not have my permis sion. Of course, the individual who happens to be charged may be saying some thing completely differe nt.

Those kinds of disputes are inevitably going to lead to other quasi-judicial battles over the custody of the vehicle and the le gitimacy of the impounding, those kinds of questions which tend to drag out. So we may see circumstances where the owner did not believe he gave consent to an individual, who turned out to be impaired and had the car impounded, and then really the injured party ends up being the person who, although he owned the car, was not res ponsible. So you have to have a way of res olving those in an expeditious manner.

You simply cannot leave someone hanging out ther e because someone, without his consent, has assumed responsibility for driving or taking charge of the vehicle. · 716 I think that, as I said at the beginning, there is some balance in this legislation and it is only an attempt. Ther e are going to be those who can criticize it legitimately from some perspect ive, but again the test of whether the legislation is fair is probably not going to be interpr eted in this forum but in some other court of competent jurisd iction, and they will look at the question of balance. So I think it is addressed in this Bill.

There are a number of other sections which I think add to the balance, and that is the issue of tempor ary licence, not wanting to create a circumstance which entails only hardship for the person charged or the regi stered owner. Mr . Deputy Speaker , ther e are a couple of other parts of the legislation that I want to comment on. One of them that I fou nd particularly interes ting was the ability to proh ibit out-of-province dr ivers.

That has been a par ticular sore point with most of the law enforcement officers whom I know are enfor cing the law in the province, because ther e is a tendency not to want to inconvenience tr avellers through our province by suspending their licence or by creating unnecessary judicial problems for them.

I think that we clearly have to have something on the books in Manitoba which will allow a police officer to use his judgment about the natur e of the danger present from someone who is out of province but is nonetheless dr iving in a way which is hazardous to the health of our own res idents or hazard ous to the life of our own re sidents. This provides some additional power or it clarifies, I guess real ly, powers that police officers may have been wielding without the necessary authori ty, and this par ticular clause in the legislation I think adds something that has been missing in the past. Mr .

Deputy Speaker , there is also a pr ovision that deals with repeat off enders. Another problem which we have heard addressed in the media that comes about as a re sult of a person without a licence, or a person who has been disqualified from having a licence, or a person under the age necessary for obtaining for dr iver's licence, who now will have his future rights curtailed. What it is saying basically is that if you are driving without a licence, you may actually disqualify yourself from having a licence in the futu re, and that is something that I think is important.

We have seen too many instances in the Pr ovince of Manitoba where an individual with complete disregard for the life and safety of everyone ar ound him, complete disregard for the law, has said, well, I do not have a licence. I can drink and driv e because my licence cannot be taken away anyway. In fact, that has happened in the pr ovince and the judges look at it and say, well, we cannot suspend his licence, and they do not seem to have the power to disqualify in advance or at some future time his right to obtain a licence.

This really is saying that whether or not you have a licence, whether you have had one suspended, whether you have never had one, whether you are under the legal age, if you drink and dri ve there are going to be consequences, that the problem is not going to be ignored .- (Interjection)- Well, Mr . Deputy Speaker, the demoted Min ister of the Environment, the former Minister of the Envir onment, with his feet up, continues

Monday, June 19, 1989 to yap from his seat as if there is nothing wro ng. Perhaps if the Minister had been so smart he would still have a decent por tfol io. * (2 100) The fact of the matter is that this Bill is going to be supported by the majority of the Members in this Legislature. I think it deserves to be. There will be some criticism in committee. We have heard from groups already outside this Chamber who are prepa ring legitimate arguments against the legislation, raising leg itima te concerns abo ut the balance between individual rights and the rights of society to prote ct itself and protect its members.

But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on balance, we have to do what we think is right. Th ere has to be a balance when it comes to the individual versus society. The Bill, as I have suggested, tries to create that balance by protect ing innocent people in these kinds of dr amas while, at the same time, making sur e that respon sibility is borne by those who are re sponsible, and legislation can do no more. I will be suppor ting this legislation as we move it on to second read ing. I will be watching with interest what groups, like the Manitoba Association for Rights and Liber ties, have to say about the legislation.

I think that we have to be cognizant about the kind of force we use to impose society's will on individuals, but the bottom line is we also have the obligation to prote ct those individuals, and I think this Bill goes some way to doing that

part icular objective justice. Thank you, Mr . Deputy Speaker . Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson ): I also intend to par ticipate in this debate. I can indicate that a number of Members from our side of the House have spoken because we feel this is an important area. It is important to discuss our appro ach to liquor laws in Manitoba. It is important to discuss this par ticular Bill which deals with the problems we face with dr unken driv ing. I think it is important to address those general areas because they are certainly areas of major concern.

I want to indicate that although I will be the final speaker from our caucus on this, and that we anticipate on being able to send this Bill to committee tonight for considera tion later this week, I can indicate that our caucus will continue to participate in the debate on this Bill at committee stage and possibly even at thir d read ing stage because when we are dealing with legislation we have to deal with not just the general principle, but the specifics.

Now in second read ing, we addr ess essentially the general principl es of the Bill, and I want to indicate that I have no problems with the general princi ples of having tougher laws in this province involving dr unken driv ers. I re ally believe, Mr . Deputy Speaker, that the statistics speak for themselves an d, even more than the statistics, the traged ies that have been caused by drunk en dr ivers speak for themselves.

One only has to talk to people who have had members of their family injur ed or killed by drun ken dr ivers to real ize the problem it is in our society, and even perhaps to talk to some of the dr unken dr ivers themselves, Mr . Deputy Speaker, because I believe, in many cases, there is a 717 very real remor se about what has taken place and a very real fe eling that there should have been better efforts to prevent dr unken driving. I believe. that tougher penalties are necessary because I really belie ve there has been a tr emendous impr ovement in this area in the last number of years.

Despite the continuing problems, I really believe that in society today we have a much better attitude towards drinkin g and dr iving than we did 10 years ago, and even 20 years ago. I believe 10 and 20 years ago, it was not considered to be that much of a problem, if one had had one too many, to be driving one's care home. It was considered almost to be standard practice.

I cert ainly remem ber the attitude in my student days when I freq uented the many bars in Winnipeg and the attitudes toward drinkin g and driving then among young people was one of concern, not something you wanted to get caught doing, but perhaps not something that was particularly serious. I think what has happened is there is this social rea lization tha t dr inking and driving is absolutely .41 unacceptable. Tha t in itself is prev enting people, � thr ough social pressure, peer gr oup pressure, from pr oceeding to drinking and driving. I think that is one of the key things that has changed.

It is partly as a re sult of the penalties that have incr eased and certainly they have over the years, but I think it is also because of peer group pressure. There is a very different attitude I find today for example at, say, house parties or socials. I was just at a social this weekend in my constituency, the wind-up for the Darts banquet. I can say that in the last 10 years the number of cars in the park ing lot at that social is halved, with the same number of people attending the social. The reason is more and more people are doubling up.

They are taking cabs, they are having driv ers be designated who will not drink that night and will take the driving resp onsibilities. I think that has become very clear, par ticularly in northern communities and rural communities wher e people are not taking the chance of drinking and driving anymore. The y are res ponding to the peer group pr essure, the pr essure from their fellow members of the community, .41 say, in the Thompson social or their friends at a party.� It is considered now acceptable, I think, in a party environment to tell a friend not to drink and dr ive, to offer to send them home in a cab.

I have a standard practice. I know when I invite friends over and I have re gular social events, as many of us do as Members of the Legislature, to offer to pay anybody's cab fare home whether they feel they are over the limit or not, because I think the real bottom line is if we are going to eliminate drinking and driving, we have to eliminate many of the gr ey areas that do develop, where people are not quite sur e if they are over the limit or not.

I think it has been demonstr ated that even people who are mar ginally over the .08 can get themselves into horrendous dif ficulties that could lead to many very serious accidents. That is something, I think, that society has accepted. Despite that, despite the gr owing realizat ion of the diff iculties with drinking and drivi ng, I believe ther e are still many people, a significant number of people, who

Monday, June 19, 1989 do not take their respon sibilities as citizens seri ously enough in this particular instance. Despite the fines and despite the penalties that have taken place, I believe there are some individuals who have not accepted the very real problem that exists with drinking and driving. That is why I suppor t one of the princi ples in this Bill, which is to deal with situations where suspended dr ivers -and we have seen it and it happened in Winnipeg-will come out of the courts having had their licence suspended, and they will get in their vehicle and the y will dr ive away.

Tha t is absolutely unacceptable. It is contempt not just for the law but for their fello w citizens. I think that we have to be very clear to them that is absolutely unacceptable. I am pleased to see some of the pr ovisions in the Bill that will deal with that. I think we do have to be cognizant of the rights of citizens. I cer tainly look forward to the input at the committee.

I really believe that there may be some amendments that may be necessary in terms of making sure that this does comply with the Ch arter of Rights, but I believe that for every right there is an equal . re sponsibility on behalf of citizens. When we are dealing, in this particular case, with-a nd I agree with the Minister of Highways and Tran sportat ion (Mr . Albert Dried ger) -d rivi ng, I believe driving is not a right, it is a privi lege that is gr anted by society to fellow members.

I believe, par ticularly in this case wher e we are talking about a privilege, that there is a double respon sibility for the Minister of Northern Affa ir s (Mr . Downey), on behalf of individuals who are driving to absolutely and whole-hearted ly not drink and dr ive and run the risks not just to themselves but to their fello w citizens. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have talked about the princ iples of the Bill. I also want to talk, as have a number of Members of our caucus, about the inconsistency of the current Gover nment's approach in this

part icular area. When I say this parti cular area, I include not just drinking and driving but in terms of liquor laws in general . I real ly believe there is an inconsistency from Members opposite in their attitudes towards drinking and driving liquor laws. I want to begin by saying that I am not a believer in proh ibition or temperance. I tend to believe that in some regard our liquor laws are probably too restrictive. I will give a few examples of that in a couple of minutes because I think it will make my point quite clearly. I am not coming from that

part icular perspective, but at the same time I also believe that we should not be out promo ting the consumption of alcohol. I real ly take the attitude we should not be promo ting, as has this Govern ment th rough its acceptance of expanded adver tising, for example, as it may be doing through its proposals from the Liquor Com mission, we are not sure yet. .. (2 11 0) Th ere may be some acceptance of some of the proposal s, to my mind, would gr eatly increase the amount of promotion of the consumption of alcohol. I do not agree with that.

I believe ther e is enough evidence to show that alcohol does lead to social 718 problems, at least to health problems. It cer tainly leads to problems in this

part icular case in terms of drinking and dr iving that we, in society, should not be promoting the comsumption of alcohol. I tend to believe that alcohol, when it is available, should be available in far mor e fle xible form ats than it is currently. I want to give you a classic example of how I feel the system works against itself. In committee last year, when the Minister re sponsible for Justice brought in changes to The Liquor Control Act, there was a very good presen tation by the propr ietor of a local pub in Winnipeg, The King's Head.

It is a Britis h-style pub, and he pointed to the fact that establishment is having considerable dif ficulty with our liquor laws in this province. It is a neighbourho od style, Briti sh-style pub. Ther e are a number of others in the city that have a very similar format. It has run into dif ficulties with the Liquor Comm ission time and time again. Just across the street from that particular establishment, there is another establishment, a hotel, which also fronts on Main Street and has had over 160 police visits in a period of six months.

The King's Head has had none and yet the King's Head finds it has difficulties with the liquor laws.

I can show Mem bers op posite the par ticular reg ulations, the particular laws and particular diff iculties, while this Main Street hotel, which I am told has virtually everything that is illegal available in Winnipeg, available right in that hotel in the rooms in one way, shape or form , that hotel has been able to operate under our liquor laws unimpeded for the last number of years, because we have a system that is based on large hotels and basically having people commute to those hotels, drink, and then go back to their home. I believe that is wr ong.

I believe there should be room, as there is in other pr ovinces, in British Co lum bia for ex ample, for neighbourhood pubs. One of the reasons I believe that is because, by having neighbour hood pubs, people would not have to dr ive to and from that pub. The y would not have to dr ive to and from the suburban hotel, the larger hotels that we have in place. They would not have to be out afterwards, after hours and be on the road and in many cases be over the limit, be drunk en driv ers. I raise that because I really believe if the Minister resp onsible for the Liquor Commis sion, the Minister of Justice (Mr .

Mccrae), wants to be consistent in dealing with this type of legislation in Bill 3 and trying to reform our liquor laws, that is a way that it should be done. I want to stress I am not suggesting we would end up in a situation where there would be no hotels, no bars, no hotels. I am not suggesting anything that would eliminate the many countr y hotels which do combine many dif ferent functions including that.

I real ly believe that by being mor e fle xible in terms of neighbourhood pubs, we would end up in a situation, we would not only give people more flexible choice in choosing where they do wish to consume alcohol, which is their right, but we would also help prev ent drinkin g and driving. I have found that for many average citizens in this pr ovince that is self-evident. The y look at that and they

Monday, June 19, 1989 say that is logical. Yet, we as legislators, despite repeated amendments to The Liquor Contr ol Act, have not come to that real ization. Since I have been in this Cham ber, I can recall for example eliminating the supper hour closing which was very unpopular, I know, with a number of establishments and the hotels. Quite fr ankly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I was so ambivalent about that change because, once again, it was a contr ol, perhaps an anachronism but a contr ol that was in place that did tend to put some sort of control on drinking, and was not an onerous burden.

In that case, we were told we have to be consistent with the lounges, for example, where alcohol is available. We went through that same process in extending the hour s until two o'clock, same pr ocess. The y say, it is logical and consistent to expand from one o'clock until two o'clock. I recall many other such arg uments that were made by lobby groups and very, very logical arg uments, legitimate ar guments from their point of view, pointing out inconsistencies. When I look at it and I do not just pick on this Government. I believe this has been a problem in this province for the last number of years.

I real ly believe we have had piecemeal changes to The Liquor Control Act, some of which have been more negative than positive, and that what we re ally need is an overall reform that would combine two things, I believe, not have the promot ion of alcohol but on the other hand allow people to have a fle xible consumption pattern when they do decide to consume it. That is why I stress neighbourho od pubs, but ther e are many other things that could be done. I think we need a new appr oach to liquor laws in Manitoba.

I believe that because my experience has been that the best countries, in terms of attitudes towards alcohol, are not those countries where there is strictly the strongest, tightest controls against the use of alcohol. I point to Eur ope, for example, a number of countries in Eu rope that I have very direct knowledge of. I will take Gr eece, for example. My wif e is Gr eek. I have had the oppor tunity to visit Gr eece on a number of occasions. In Gr eece, there is no drinking age. A 16-year-old can walk into a bar and ask for any type of alcohol they wish. An Honourable Me mber: Good old ouzo. Mr.

Ashton: Well, not quite ouzo but they could ask for ouzo too if they wanted. You go to a place fr equented by young people in Gr eece, for exam ple, and what happens? You will find they dr ink Pepsi, they drink 7- Up. I can tell you in Thompson right now, if you went to a place freq uented by 16-year-olds and you gave them a choice whether they could drink 7-Up or beer, they would go for beer overwhel mingly because there is a sense that beer is somewhat taboo, and to come of age one has to drink.

I do not want to necessarily put anyone on the spot in this House, cer tainly not myself, but going into the bars under age is cer tainly a trad ition. It is almost a passage, a rite of adulthood in this province of getting 719 in. I suppose for some Members of this House it would have been when they were under 21. I came after the red uction of the drinking age to 18. I know many people did not wait until they were 18 to go to a bar, because it is seen as being something that is taboo and is peer group pressure. They place a gr eat deal of pressu re on people.

This weekend, many high schools will be holding gradua tions for example. One of the things that was a feature in Thompson at gr aduations was basically overc onsumption of alcohol to the extreme, and not just by the gr aduates but by a lot of the Gr ade 9s, Gr ade 10s and Gr ade 11 s who would go out and who would use the excuse of the gr aduation to really drink excessively. I saw what that did in terms of people being physically sick in a lot of cases, and people then dr iving afterwards back. It is amazing that in Thompson ther e were not mor e accidents as a resu lt of that.

It is that whole mentality that we have. I compare that to countr ies where you will find the attitude towards drinking is that if you want to dr ink � that is fine, but you real ize that there are social � pr essures. In Gr eece, there is a good example. Ther e are no drinkin g laws in terms of the age. You can take alcohol anywhere, on a picnic or wherever, but there is not that sense that it is a taboo and you do not get the abuse. I am not suggesting a move to the Gr eek system necessarily.

I do not think that you can adjust from one cultur e to another cultur e overnight, but I do think it shows that by being relatively fle xible in terms of allowing the consumption in various different ways, being fairly tight in some other areas -t hey are very tough on drinkin g driv ers by the way. That is considered absolutely unacceptable in that country, many countries in Europe, and this is part of this Bill-a nd at the same time work ing towards societal pressure to get more resp onsible drinking, I think that you can get re sults. What I would hope out of this Government, Mr.

Deputy Speaker , is more than just Bill 3 in terms of liquor control amendments. I would look for more than they brought in last time. What I would look for is a general � approach that would emphasize respo nsible drinking, � not more drinking which I believe they unfor tunately did last year with their amendments, but more re sponsible drinking. I think that can be achieved in Manitoba. I re ally belie ve that we do have some possibilities to bring in some significant refo rms that could significantly help us and would lead, I believe, to as much benefit to society as this par ticular Bill.

As much as I like to think that this Bill will make a differe nce-a nd I believe it probably will-I believe this will further dr ive down the percentage of drinking by 10 percent or 20 perc ent. It will still leave many people who are drinking excessively getting into situations of drinking and driving, getting into situations of alcohol abuse. Many case of wife abuse and child abuse are alcohol related ; many cri mes are alcohol related . I think it is absolutely vital, and I hope the Minister of Justice (Mr .

Mccrae) is listening to this because this is something that I will be raising in the futur e and I know our caucus will be raisi ng. It re ally is no t satisfactory as far as we are concerned.

Monday, June 19 , 19 89 On the one hand, to bring in the kind of re gulations we saw last year which, I believe, will promo te drinking in this provi nce, I do not think it is sufficient for the Government to accept this document being put forward by the Liquor Control Commis sion without reject ing immediately many of the propo sals and then on the other hand talk about this type of Bill.

I would suggest what they should do is really re think not this Bill per se-1 think this Bill is fairly good in princi ple- but re think their gener al approach to alcohol. • (2 120) As I said, and the Minister of Northern Affa ir s (Mr . Downey) seems to agree with it, I would hope they would go back to the dr awing board and come up with a dif ferent approach, a major refo rm. The Minister of Justice (Mr . Mccrae) has an opport unity here to do something that has not been done in 20 years in this province, come back with a reform that will bring in mor e resp onsible drinking.

I really believe that is what people can agree with. It is very rare that we get a .,• consensus on major is sues, including liquor consumption, but most people I talk to say the same thing. They do not want alcohol use being prom oted with kids. The y believe that the kids are picking up from ads on the news. You know, they can pick it up at supper hour now. They believe there is enough promotion as it is. We have enough consumption without dealing with that. They also, on the other hand, believe there should be more fle xible consumption allowed.

If you are going to drink, you should be able to drink at a neighbour hood pub. Th ere should be mor e flexible attitudes that way. I think the bottom line is they feel that without increasing liquor consumption, we can have a much better situation in society. I really hope the Minister of Justice (Mr . Mccrae) will look at that because I believe there may be some possibilities of all three Parties agre eing with some consensus on that. I would even go so tar as to suggest that there should be some sort of a task force developed that will look at the whole area of liquor policy.

It is not as original as the -(Interje ction)- I rea lly wish the Minister of Northern Affa irs (Mr . Downey) would not give me quite so much cred it. I am not suggesting it is original. I just think it is something that has not been done in many years in this province. Many of the proposals that were brought in, in terms of liquor laws that we currently have in place, the modern izations, were brought about as a result of a report that was done many years ago in this province on liquor laws. We have not done anything in this provinc e in the way of a compr ehensive review in 10 years or 20 years.

I would like see a task force or a committee go thr oughout the pr ovince and take submissions from people. We might come up with an even better idea than this in terms of dealing with drinki ng and driving. I am sure we would. come up with much better liquor laws. I think we would not end up with the kind of situation that we are facing now in this Bill that we basically have no problem in our caucus, in the New Democratic Party, in supporting the general principle of this Bill, but we wond er, wher e is the consistency? 720 I do not see the consistency. I hope the Minister of Justice (Mr .

Mccrae) will take our comments, take my comments and the comments of our members of our caucus, as we do pass this Bill into committee. At least when we are dealing with the next round of liquor control amendments, come back with a package that makes a lot mor e sense, not just to us. I think we are probably just reflectiv e of the population as a whole, but it is more reflective I think of the needs of the people of Manitoba out there. I think there are ways in which we can reform liquor laws and reform them positively. With that, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, once again, our caucus will support this Bill passing second read ing, going into committee, and we look forward to a discussion in committee. Hon. James Mccrae (Min ister of Justice and Attorney Gener al): Mr . Deputy Speaker, it is a pleasure tor me to rise and take

part in the debate on Bill No. 3, hopefully the last contri bution before the Bill is passed on to committee for further study. I must say I am pleased at the support which ultimately has come ar ound for this Bill. I think it is a tri bute to the lar ge amount of dedicated work that has been done by various departments of Government over some extended period of time in order to get a Bill that will receive ultimately, I hope, the resou nding support of this House, and I think it already has the resou nding support of Manitobans.

Before I get into some of the thoughts that I have and which have been committed to paper by people in the depart ment to assist me in getting thr ough this stage, I should re spond to a number of the comments that have been made by the last few contri butors to this debate. I do not wish to get into a free-fo r-all, and a knock 'em-down, dr ag-'em-out fight over the issue of liquor control and the control of impair ed dr ivi ng and suspended driving in our province.

I must say that from my friends in the New Democratic Party today I am receiving some messages that are mixed in the extreme, the suggestions made by some, notably the last speaker, the Honour able Member for Thom pson (Mr . Ashton), that the appr oach taken by this Gover nment is not a consistent one. Yet if I take his comments, compare them with the comments of the Honourable Member for Elmwood (Mr . Maloway), the Honourable Member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis), the Honourable Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill), the Honour able Mem ber for Flin Flon (Mr .

Storie), perhap s the Honourable Member for Churchill (Mr . Cowan) as well, ther e are a number of messages coming from those Honourable Members and they are not the same. With all due respect , Mr. Deputy Speaker, there is qu ite a variety of react ions coming from those Honour able Members. I cer tainly do appr eciate that Members in the New Democratic Party join with the rest of us in this House in expres sing our outr age at the carnage and the destruction and the ruined lives, the injuries and the gr ief that is caused on our streets and highways in this provi nce.

I do appreciate their support, and your suppor t I hope, Mr . Deputy Speaker , when the time comes for .this. ·

-- ---- ---------- Monday, June 19 , 19 89 We are talking about mixed messages and without getting into all of the details because the Honourable Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill), I am sure, does not really want me to get into all of the details of what has been going on in this province for the last 20 or so years with regard to the contr ol of alcohol, beer and spirits, whatever you might want to call it. I am not going to go into that kind of detai l because Governments come and Governments go, and changes are made in our society as society prog resses with the times.

Changes in liquor control in Manitoba have changed significantly over the last centur y or so, and certainly a lot of changes have happened in the 20 or so years leading up to the last year or so. Changes made in the last year pale compared with changes made by previous Govern ments, notably New Democratic Governments. I really do not want to get into that in a lot of detail, but the point is- I am trying to choose my words very carefully here -the comments I have been hearing do amount, at least if not to hypocrisy, at least to mixed messages coming from the New Democratic Party.

Honour able Members, let me deal for a moment with some of the comments of the Honour able Member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis). The Honour able Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill), if she stays ar ound, may want me to get into some of her comments too. For example, the Honourable Member for St. Johns referred to changes made in the last Session rela ting to the advert ising of beer and wine prior to 10 p.m. and how that amounts to some terri ble message we are sending to people in Manitoba about the use of beer and wine. Aside from the fact the Honour able Member for St.

Johns would be the first to applaud the bre wing industry for its "drink res ponsibly" campaigns, spending some of their own profit dollars to educate the public about resp onsible drinking habits for those who choose to drink, the broad casters also have taken what I think is a resp onsible role. Before I refer to their role, I will refer a little bit to the histor y of the changes in the last Session. For some 20 years in this province, our local Manitoba broadcasters have suffered discri mination at the hands of Govern ments in this province.

It took this minority Cons ervative Govern ment to have the courage to come for ward with changes which wou ld rem ove the discrimination in the marketpla ce. The question being asked now by the Honourable Member for Thompson (Mr . Ashton), the ar gument is that you cannot just pick and choose where you are going to discrimi nate. I believe New Democrats as a matter of philosophy abhor discri mination unless it happens to be against broadcasters who want the same rights as cable operators beaming into our living rooms in Manitoba. I think that is probably the reason the Liberal Party accepted the amendment.

I do not think they liked them very much mor e than I did but the point is they do not believe in discri mination either , and they probably do not mind seeing a few adver tising dollars being spent in Manitoba, which I do not mind either . On that point, I have to stress to the Honourable Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill) especially, who raised 721 this matter that when it comes to-in fact it was the Honourable Member for Logan who was concerned that people would be watching this adver tising dur ing the dinner hour , which they could be watching on their cable stations anyway.

Now it bothers her that Manitoba br oadcasters are extended that same rate. I am saying to the Honour able Member that it was her Party, the New Democratic Party, that allowed beverage room and beer parlour licences to remain open between the hour s of 6:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m., the supper hour . It was her Gov ernment that did that, not mine. (Mr . Speaker in the Chair .) • (2 130) I have two single-spaced pages here, Mr .

Speaker , of li ber alizing ini tiativ es on the part of the Ne w Democratic Party, including red ucing the drinking age, including matters such as extending dr inking hours, allowing cheques to be cashed in beer parlours, all those things, but I am not going to take that approa ch. What I am going to do is say that what we have here ii is a fundamental dif ference in philosophy between the � Prog ressive Cons ervat ive Party and the Ne w Democratic Party. No doubt there were Cons ervat ives in Manitoba, who complained about some of the changes made by the New Democrats. No doubt that happened.

I might have complained myself about some of them if I had been here. Now we have New Democrats, who suppor ted moves of the kind that I have menti oned -(Int er jection) - yes, you did complaining about sampling of a thir d of an ounce of wine in the liquor store, complaining about changes in adver tising, complaining about a better service to the public thr ough the use of cheque-cashing cards in liquor stores, a move which must at one point have been supported by the NOP or they would not have allowed people to cash their pay cheques in beer parlours. I ask you, Mr . Speaker , there is a message there.

Get ting back to thi s fund amental diffe rence in philosophy, this is it. I am proud that Bill No. 3 stands in the name of Honour able Minister of Highways (Mr . Albert Driedger), speaking for our Government, to tighten up on impair ed dr iving and suspended dr iving in this province. I am not paternalistic and I am not Big Broth er. Here is the dif ference between our position and that of the New Democrats. The New Democrats want to pr otect people from themselves. The Cons ervat ive Party says do not drink and dr ive, it is against the law and you will be punished.

If you are convicted, we will take adminis trativ e measures to prote ct society in the meantime. We are not telling people what they can and cannot do, we are telling them what the law is. The New Democr ats want to point peo ple in certain dir ections. This is the fundam ental philosophic dif ference between the two

Part ies. I suppose I could lump the Liberal Party in with the New Democrats, but I suppose they will want to speak for themselves on this issue. I do say that is the differ ence. That does not mean that we are going to go out holus-bolus and allow liquor to flow through the streets so that our childr en and everyone else can just gobble

t Monday, June 19 , 19 89 it up, and do all kinds of damage in our society. What I am saying is that you are free, you are gr own-up in this pro vince over the age of 18, entitled to do what you like with your life, but do not drink and dr ive because that is the wrong thing to do. It is against the law. We will take measures with the help of our colleagues in this House to tr y and put a stop to that. Getting back to the Brewers Association and the broad casters, the Honourable Member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) says they are such gr eat friends of the Con servative Party.

Well, ther e was a time I wondered what the broadcasters had done for us lately, I can tell you, and I am sur e there have been times in all of our lives as politicians when we wonder what the broa dcasters have done for us lately. I am telling you, there is no need to allow discrimi nation to exist in the broadcast industry any more than among women or any other people in our society, the visible minoritie s or minorit ies of any kind. There really is no room for discr imination.

Yet Honour able Members of the New Democratic Party sugge st we shou ld allow the diSCiimination to continue with iespect to broadcasting. Then again, not all Mem bers of the New Democratic Party, if I heard what the Honour able Member for Elmwood (Mr . Maloway) said today, that feeling is not shared by all Mem bers. Cer tainly the Honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr . Doer), I suggest, does not shar e the views expressed by the Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill) or the Member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis). The Honour able Member for St.

Johns also talked about the adver tising of beer and wine on this non discri minatory basis, having the effect of promo ting the further consumption of beer and wine, when I tell you that the stud ies have told the Liquor Control Commission that adver tising, at a time like now of diminishing consumption, adver tising has the effect of perhaps changing one's mind about one's choice of brand as opposed to guzzling more beer or guzzling mor e wine. The Honourable Member for Logan (Ms.

Hemphill) would also suggest that having a sip of wine at the liquor stor e as you tr y to make up your mind which wine you would like to purchase for your dinner guests or whatever , that somehow you should have an ALER T machine out in front of the liquor store because a thir d of an ounce of wine is going to create all kinds of havoc in our province. I am saying to you, Mr . Speaker , the Honourable Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill) knows better . The Honour able Member for Logan, I am not sur e what tack she is on. I really will leave it up to others to decide the integrity of those types of criticisms.

With regard to convenience cards, Mr. Speaker, when you run a monopoly in a provi nce as we do, cer tainly in the City of Winnipeg with respect to the distribution of alcoholic beverages, it seems to me that it is only right that you should be provi ding services to the people which meet some minimum standard of a decent level of servi ce. I think even the Honourable Members in the New Democratic Party would agree with that statement.

Although we do sometimes differ on how we get to the same place, I think we are all headed in that same direc tion. 722 As I say, I am not going to go thr ough the single spaced list of measures which would tend to liberal ize our liquor laws in this province from 1982 all the way through to 1987. Ther e is really no need for me to do that. I think the point has been made, the moves that have been made by the new Gover nment of Manitoba are far less in the dir ection of liberal izing our liquor laws than some of the moves that had been made by the pr evious Government. That being said, Mr .

Speaker, I will deal for a few minutes with some of the mor e technical aspects of this Bill. I encourage Honour able Members to listen because I know cer tainly the Honourable Member for St. James (Mr . Edwards) and the Honourable Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill) are inter ested in these matters, are generally supportiv e of what we are trying to do, and we appr eciate that.

I think some of the following comments might help allay some of their fears in addition to some of the other things we are doing, including a meeting we are having tomor row morning in this building with some representativ es from the State of Minnesota, who wiii be here to assist Honour able Members in understanding some of the things we are trying to do with regard to impaired and suspended dr iving in our province.

The experience of Minnesota and other states of the United States of America, in addition to Gr eat Britain and Scandinavia, has been positive with regard to the red uction of impair ed driving, and consequently safety on our streets and highways. I want to thank the two Opposition Parties for the co-oper ation they have shown in agre eing to debate this Bill and to give it second read ing so that it can move on to committee.

Before the House sends the Bill to committee, however, I believe it is approp riate to review brie fly the reasons for this Bill being intr oduced and to provide Members of the House with an update on the prog ress that is being made in implementing the parts of the Govern ment, anti-impair ed driving package that do not form part of this legislation. As most Honourable Members are aware, cracking down on impair ed dr ivers was a specific campaign prom ise of the Prog ressive Cons ervative Par ty.

We put forward dur ing the last election campaign an eight point program, and when we formed the Go vernment that program was given to the Civil Service for its review and its comments. The Honourable Member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) referred earlier to our eight point program and went thr ough them

chapter and verse, suggested that we are moving on very many of them. The fact is, we are moving on virtually most of them or all of them with these measures and others that we will be proposing at futur e times. The point is the Honourable Member for St. Johns clearly supporting Bill No. 3 had to say something. As it tu rned out, the things she said did not make any sense and did not make any

part icular point, but that is all right. I respect the Honourable Member for St. Johns when she is standing on her feet in whatever she will say in this debate to suppor t this Bill. That is a good thing because this Bill is going to save lives, Mr . Speaker, and that is what I am here for, and that is what other Honourable Members are here for too.

Monday, June 19 , 1989 Because of the crush of busi ness necessary to prepare for the Session last July, it was not possible to prod uce a complete program . Now perhaps the Honourable Member for St. James (Mr . Edwards) felt that between May and July of last summer we should have put together the compr ehensive prog ram that has been put together over the past year. The fact is, Rome was not built in a day, and a good prog ram like the one we are bringing forward is not built in the shor t space of time we had at that time.

We felt it was better to take the risk of being crit icized for acting mor e slowly than to rush into a program without having it analyzed thoroughly. I have learned that criticism from the Honour able Member for St. Jame s is probably some thing that should be encouraged , because when the Honour able Member criti cizes sometimes he actually has something to say. Quite often though, his criticism has the ultimate re sult of turning back on him and ser ving the Government better in the long run.

That being said, I must add that the Honourable Mem ber qu ite oft en makes some suggestions that are looked into by Gover nment, acted on, and some of those suggestions benefit society as a whole. We have a mixed situation there, too. * (2 140) Mr. Speaker , when the last Session was completed, there were large brie fi ng books prepar ed by the Civil Service with the pros and the cons, not only of those matters that had been referred to the Civil Service, but also of a series of other ideas that had been tried in other jurisdictions.

As well, ther e was the impoundment of-cars idea which to the best of our knowledge is unique. That, I submit, is a reaso nable way to pro ceed and the way that we are likely to make the best use of Manitobans' tax dollars. As a small province, we should avoid reinv enting the wheel and we should avoid trying those ideas which, although they sound good, have been tried in other jurisdictions and have failed. When the program was review ed, it was obvious that the administrative licence suspension would be the most eff ective but also the most contentious item.

As Memb ers opposite know, an opinion from the Cons titutional Law Branch was sought, and that opinion has led to significant changes in the concept as it was origi nally presented . In par ticular, any reference to a dr iver being impair ed has been dr opped. The proced ur e this Bill establishes is a purely administrativ e one and, ther ef ore, there should not be any evidentiary questions regard ing the signs of impairment. This legislation authorizes the suspension only when there is a breath alcohol content over 0.0 8 or a refusal to pro vide that sample. Moreover, an appeal has been built into the process.

It is of course appropriate and necessary that this House consider the individual rights implications of every Bill that is brought before it. It is, however, our duty as legislators to make a judgment whether a potential infringement of a Ch arter right is justified by 723 a gr eater society concern that is compatible with the free and democratic natur e of Canadian society. I believe this Bill, as stated by the Honour able Member for Flin Flon (Mr . Storie), provides a proper balance of the rights of society as opposed to the rights of the individual. We mus t be clear about one thing.

Ther e is no right in anyone to dr ive while impaired . The pr ovince has a clear duty to take action to make its streets and highways safe from impair ed driv ers. Most Honourable Members will not be aware of the Presi dential Comm ission on Drunk Driving that issued its final report in November of 1983. Administrativ e licence suspension was fou nd by the commission to be a very effective means of red ucing accidents on the road . This one will interest you for sure, Mr . Speaker .

In Ok lahoma, there was a 25 percent red uction in alcohol related fatalities and an alcohol-related crash reduction of 4 1 perc ent. Tha t is enough to make anyone sit up and take notice. Indiana reported a 36 percent reduction in alcohol-r elated fatal accidents, and when Io wa introd uced this admin istrativ e licence suspension � pr ocedure, deaths on the highways dr opped to their lowest level since 1946. Imagine, Mr . Speaker , the year you were born, that is how long ago that came along. I am sorry, someone said you were born in '49.

After reviewi ng the effectiveness of the progr am, the Pre sidential Commi ssion recommended, "States should enact legislation to req uir e prompt suspension of the licence of dr ivers charged with driving under the influ ence upon finding that the driv er had a blood alcohol content of 0. 1 0 in a legally req uested and properly administered test. The prompt suspension should also extend to those who refuse the test." I believe all of us in this Chamber hope that the introduction of this new system will produce as dr amatic re sults as were experienc ed in the United States.

Last year, there were in Winnipeg alone 2, 159 charges of driving while impair ed or driving while being over 0.08. Think of that alone, that number alone, and the potential tr agedy that can cause to families in this .4 province and to youngsters and elderly people and all , the rest of us. Distr essingly, despite the increases in penalties under the Criminal Code and despite the publicity re garding the dangers of impair ed driving, this was higher than in 1987, and indeed 20 percent more than the number of charges in 1984. Increasing the penalties alone are not sufficient.

This seems to be the knee-jerk rea ction to a number of initiatives that we bring forw ard , oh, just fine them more. Just suspend their licences longer . But you see, Mr . Speaker , those ideas have not worked in the past and besides the number of suspended dr ivers bears out my suggestion, that what we have been doing in the past has not been work ing. So it is time for a dif ferent approach, one that has been shown in other jurisdictions to work . I might add that driving while disqualified , or while prohi bited from dr iving, or while the licence is suspended is a serious pr oblem as well.

Last year in Winnipeg, there were 2,37 4 such charges laid. If I could

Monday, June 19, 19 89 quote from a paper published by the American National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and prepared for presenta tion by their Director of Safety Prog rams to an Interna tional Co nference, "Ther e may be those among you who would ask, of what value is licence suspension when most of the pers ons who lose their licences continue to dri ve without one?" Exactly the point. After re viewing various programs that had been in force, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrat ion contracted for the development of a model enforcement program against suspended dr ivers.

Again quoting the Director of Traffic Safety Program in the United States "The method most likely to be used and to achiev� success was that available to every state and community to date, checking the licence status of every dr iver contacted by the police in their normal course of duty." For this to be effective, however, the police must have 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week accurate information about the status of driv ers' licences. This is precis ely what the computer Interl ink that was announced by the provi ncial Govern ment as part of our program will pro vide, Mr. Speaker .

The impoundment of cars is a measure which we believe adds significantly to the penalty that a driv er faces if stopped by the police and charged with driving while suspended. We are not moving strictly with Bill No. 3, there are other things going on. There is the comput er link that this Government will be funding in an attempt to prot ect liv�s .. There is the Aler tmobile which is at prese ntly in Wmmpeg and the program will be expanded beyond the City of Winnipeg. Ther e are other things besides what you see in Bill No. 3, Mr . Speaker . The suggestion has been made also by the Member for St. Johns (Ms.

Wasylycia-Leis), perhaps others in her Party about education, a perfectly logical suggestion to me, that is what you see on televis ion. The Honour able Member for Logan (Ms. Hemphill) refers to me saying, drinking and dr iving is wrong, do not do it, then goes on to talk about sampling of wines in liquor stores, but in any event that is happening. That is happen ing, thanks to the broad casters. The broadcasters are spending $350, 000 on that pr ogram to educate Manitobans, and they seem to think that coming from me, it might make a dif ference. I would leave that for others to decide.

But the point is that is part of the education program. The brewers have their Drink Responsible Campaign. Other private sector agencies are involved, for example, the insurance industry has an interest in this matter and is doing some thing about it through poster campaigns and so on. The AFM, the Hono urable Member for Logan refers to them. Ther e are others too at a more community level, such as Canadians Against Impair ed Drivi ng, such as the young people.

Cer tainly in the Province of Manitoba, the ones that I know about, the Teens Against Dr inking and Driving, and ther e is the kind of enthusiasm there that will get the job done. I am telling you, it is very good and very gr atif ying to see young people disp laying such a res ponsible attitude about this very dangerous matter . I think we can look to them for leader ship, and we are getting it from the young people of this province. Indeed 724 that kind of leader ship is coming thr ough in the statistics.

Young people are not the people who are dr inking and dr iving to the same extent as others in our society, and they are the very people who are involved in these education programs attempting to convince their compatriots and their contemporaries to avoid this kind of behaviour . I have nothing but support for the CAID and for the TADD chapters all across this province. With regard to public education, there is more too and just in case that was not enough there is mor � and this Gover nment is involved in that. I would like to make just a couple of remarks about public education. The Honour able Member for St.

James (Mr . Edwards) has stressed the need for public education, as have Members of the New Democratic Par ty, and par ticularly the need to get public education into the schools. * (2 150) Well, here again, thanks to TADD, that is happening already but there is more to happen. More could happen and mor e will happen. We, on this side of the House agree that public education is a vital part of any progra � that seeks to red uce impaired driving and that the education of young people is par ticularly vital.

Whether or not that is the target group, that is the group we need to get to now because the time will come when they are of the age that, statistics tell us, they might get into the situation of drinking and dr iving. If the y work thr ough their TADD chapters now, perh aps the incidence of drinking and dr iving will be reduced significantly when they get a little older .

I am pleased to advise Honourable Members that agreement has been reached with the Provi nce of Alberta to permit the Province of Manitoba to adapt for Manitoba audiences a 30-minute video that Alberta developed over a period of one year after spending approxi mately $250,000 and obtaining perhaps as much money again in donated time and corp orate services. The video has been seen by Manitoba officials, and by myself I might say incidentally, and it will be off icially prem iered in Alberta very soon.

The Pro vince of Alberta has developed guidelines for using the video in the classroom as part of the health curricu lum.

We have received copies of that video and we will be establishing a working group, including representatives of the Depart ment of Education, the Depar tment of Health, the Manitoba Pu blic Insurance Corpora tion, Highways, the Department of Justice, as well as represe ntatives of Citizens Against Impaired Driving and Teens Against Drinking and Driv ing, to make the changes necessary in that video so that it reflects �anitoba law and to design the most effective way of integra ting it into the curric ulum.

Ther e are some people who would like to see this debate wound up sooner than others, but I am telling you this is the news that Honourable Members have been waiting to hear, so if they will bear with me for just a minute or two mor e-oh, I am on the last page of my notes. We will wind this thing up and everybody can go on home, safe in the knowledge that tomorrow

Monday, Jun e 19, 1989 we ar e going to have a mee ting with the se representat ives from Minnesota. We are going to learn a whole lot more about this whole thrust on the part of this Government. Then we can get on, on Thur sday evening which I hope to announce after we get this thing through and prior to ten o'clock, so we will get right into this right away here. Our off icials continue to monitor changes that are being made throughout Canada and the United States.

We hope as well to use this expanded committee to consider all other programs tha t anyone can suggest that might be effective against impair ed dr iving. In summar y, this Bill should lay the groundw ork for a reduc tion in the number of impaired driv ers on the roads, and that is what we are here to do. It is only one part and a very important part of a co-ordinated program that will continue in the futur e to be enhanced by this Govern ment, with the assistance of Honourable Mem bers in this Cham ber . Now, Mr .

Speaker , Honour able Members will be pleased to see me closing my book, concluding my contribution to this debate so that the question can be put. I see we are finishing up in reaso nable time and all Honourable Members, cert ainly Honourabl e Mem ber s who would like to 725 perhaps end this debate sooner rather than later, will be pleased about that. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. HOUS E BU SINESS Hon. James Mccrae (Government House Leader): Mr . Speaker , in connection with the Bill just passed, Bill 3, I should like to announce that this Bill would be referred to the Industrial Relations Comm ittee.

That committee is scheduled to sit Thur sday evening, 8 p.m., in Room 255. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Gov er nment House Leader (Mr . Mccrae) for that clarification. Mr. McCrae: Mr . Speaker , shall we call it ten o'clock? Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House to call it ten o'clock? (Agreed ) 4 The hour being 10 p.m., this House is now adjourned and stands adjourne d until 1: 30 p.m. tom orrow (Tuesday).

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-2-22b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 2nd hansardpdf 22b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	1f0958d18556cea1a90490912ef1342830942bb9

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