Manitoba Committee Hansard — 5 May 1992 (PUNR Committee, Sitting 4, 35th Legislature, 3rd Session)

35-3-punr4

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Third Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba STANDING COMMITTEE on PUBLIC UTILITIES and NATURAL RESOURCES 39-40 Elizabeth II Chairperson Mr. Jack Penner Constituency of Emerson VOL. XLI No.4 -10 a.m., TUESDAY, MAY 5,1992 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba ISSN 0713-9454

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thlrty·Fifth Legislature Mem bers, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ALCOCK , Re g ASHTON, Steve BARR ETT, Becky CARS TAIRS, Sharon CE RIL LI, Marianne CH EEMA, Guizar CH OMIAK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CU MM INGS, Glen, Hon. DACQ UAY, Louise DE RKA CH, Leonard, Hon. DE WAR , Gregory DOE R , Gary DOWN EY, Ja mes, Hon. DR IEDGE R, Alb ert, Hon. DUC HARM E, Gerry, Hon. EDW AR DS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ER NST, Ji m, Hon. EVAN S, Ciif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDL AY, Glen, Hon. FR IESEN, Je an GAUDRY, Neil GIL LESHAM MER, Harold, Hon.

HARPER, El ijah HE LWER , Edw ard R. HICK ES, George LAMOUREUX , Kevin LA THLIN, Oscar LAUR ENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTIND ALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, Ja mes, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCH ELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD , Harold ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PENNE R, Ja ck PLOHMAN, Jo hn PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RE ID, Daryl RE IME R, Ja ck RE NDE R, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. RO SE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORI E, Je rry SV EINSON, Ben VO DR EY, Ro semary, Hon.

WASYL YC IA-LEIS, Ju dy WOWC HUK , Rosann CONSTITUEN CY Osborne Thompson Wellington River Heights Ra disson The Maples Ki ldonan Portage Ia Prairie Ste. Ro se Seine River Ro bl in-Ru ssell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. Ja mes Lakeside Ch arleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Ru pertsland Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elm wood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Em erson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St.

Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Ki rkfield Park Rin Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Jo hns Swan River PARTY Liberal NDP NDP Liberal NDP Liberal NDP PC PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Liberal PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Liberal PC NDP PC NDP Liberal NDP PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP

78 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC UTILITIES AND NATURAL RESOURCES Tuesday, May 5, 1992 TIME - 10 a.m. LOCATION- Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRP ERSON- Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson) ATTENDANCE- 9- QUORUM- 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Mr. Downey Messrs. Ashton, Edwar ds, Gaud ry, Hickes, Laurendeau, McAlpine, Penner Subs titution: Mr. Rose for Mrs.

Dacquay APPEARING: Je rry Storie, MLA for Fli n Flon Ch arles Cu rtis, Chie f Execut iv e Offi cer, Manitoba Energy Authority MATTERS UNDER DISCUSSION: Annual Rep orts of the Manit oba Ener gy Authority for the years ended March 31 , 19 90, and March 31 , 19 91. * * * Mr. Chairperson: Would the Stand ing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources please come to order. We are going to be considering this morning the Manitoba Energy Authority for the years 19 90 and 19 91. Did the minister have a statement to make? Hon. James Downey (Minister of Energy and Mines): Yes, Mr.

Ch airpe rson, I have a bri ef statement to make. The individuals whom I have with me this morning are Mr. Charlie Curtis, the Deputy Minister of Finance, also is the Exec utive Director of the Energy Authority, and Mr. Henryk Mordarski, who is with Crown counsel, respo nsible for the Manitoba Energy Authority fr om the Crown counsel's position. These will be the last two reports. There will be operating reports of The Manitoba Energy Authority Act as long as it is in place. It will be putting out an annual statement basically, but it is not an operating statement. With that, Mr.

Chairperson, I would like to see these reports passed . Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Hickes, as critic for the . official opposition, would you have a statement to make? Mr. George Hlckes (Point Douglas): I would just like to say that I am very disappointed of the action of the ME A, because I am very concerned that with the dismantling of ME A that we are now only looking at energy conservation on the hydro side. We need to be looking at energy conservation and strategies for nonrenewable resources. Who will take that responsibility on? I hope to find out from this meeting.

Also, the other issue that I am quite concerned about is, a lot of the staff that were involved with the MEA, where are they at now, and if they are still part of the gov ernment ? I wi ll be aski ng those qu estio ns. I am very concerned about the personnel involved. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Edwa rds, as second official opposition mem ber, would you want to make a statement? * (1 005) Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Chairperson, I believe this is a significant event, dealing with the last two annual reports of the Manitoba Energy Authority.

I want to, on behalf of our party, indicate our support for the winding down of the Manitoba Energy Authority. In pa rticular, I want to recognize the efforts in that regard in our caucus and I believe in the Legislature at large, of the former memb er for Crescentwood, Mr. Carr, who on April 9, 19 91 , spoke in the House and outlined the reasons fo r the winding down, which I do not intend to reiterate here, but obviously made sense. The comm ents he gave I think are germane to raise again today. Mr. Chairperson, we are pleased to see that the government has seen fit to wind down the Authority.

There are other bodies in pla ce, indeed the

79 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 dep artment itself, which can adequately handle the ma ndate. We need to develop, I think, a more cohesive approach toward energy authorit y and energy managemen t in this provi nce, and this is a first step. I think the New De mocratic Party makes the mistake that more is always better. The fact is tha t cohesiveness, concerted policies are important, ones that recognize that Manitobans and indeed the players in the field, those who are looking to the government for guidance, need to know who speaks for the people of this province.

All you do by setti ng up a mult iplici ty of organiz ations that have similar mandates is confuse the issue. Somet imes that is the point of setting them up, but in this case I think the Energy Authority has served us well but has run its course. We look forward to a further streamlining of decision making so that all Manitobans, including memb ers of the Legislature, can understand, fully appreciate the policies at work in the province. Mr. Chairperson, that is in no way to be seen as an approval of the government's actions in this area.

What it is, however, is a recognit ion th at all Mani t obans des erve to ha ve a mo re comprehensible and streaml ined approach to energy authority in the province. Committee Substitution Mr. Chairperson: I wonder if I could have leave from the committee to make a comm ittee change. What I need to say to the committee is that one of the memb ers of the comm ittee phoned in th is morning sick and asked whether somebody else could replace her. I would entertain a motion from th e comm ittee to make the change from Mrs. Da cquay to Mr. Rose. Mr. Marcel Lauren deau (St. Norbert): Mr. Chairman, I move th at Mr.

Rose replace Mrs. Dacquay. Mr. Chairperson: Is there unanimous consent for making that change? Agreed. *** Mr. Chairperson: Are there any questions of the minister or his staff on the reports and, by the way, what is the will of the committee? Do we want to consider bo t h of the reports at the same time, or do you want to consider them separately? What is the wish? Floor Comment: Do them all. Mr. Chairperson: All at the same time? Okay. Are there any quest ions of the minister? Mr. Hlckes: I would like to find out how many staff positions were involved with the MEA? Mr.

Charles Curtis (Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Energy Authority): Mr. Chairperson, the former staff of the ME A, to the best of my knowledge, have all been relocated, with the exception of two individuals, a Mr. Guemili, who is our economist. We have been actively searching for positions. He is presently being conside red for two, one out of the province and one in the province. As you probably realize , we ha ve been giving him good recommendations. The other person was one of the secretaries . We were able to find two posit ions for that person at the same salary level, although not as senior positions.

At the time she had declined those two. Again, I am not sure if she is now employed or not. Mr. Hlckes: The staff were involved, in total number s- Mr. Curtis: I think it was 12 . Mr. Hickes: Out of the 12, there have been 10 that have been re-emplo yed. Is that correct? Mr. Curtis: Yes, that is correct. Mr. Hlckes: Out of that 1 O-we will get into the rhyt hm her e soon-t he salar y level of each individual, has that been maintained? Mr. Curtis: The salary level has been maintained.

Two of the senior individuals who have gone to I, T and T have had their existing salary level maintained for a two-year period even though the positions that they entered into were classified at a lower level. * (1 01 0) Mr. Hlckes: What I am hearing you say is, all individuals who were reallocated elsewhere, their salaries have been maintained at the level they were at with the MEA? Mr. Curtis: Mr. Chairperson, one individual, I am not certain about. He obtained emp loyment outside the province, in Saskatchewan. My understanding is that it is at a relatively senior level.

It is an acting vice-president of this particular corporation, and by his choice. I th ink the salary level is probably comparable or better, but I am not certain. Mr. Hlckes: I just wanted to clarify this in my own mind. When I asked the quest ion of staff who have been re-employed, what I am referring to is within

May 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 80 the province of Manitoba. If I could clarify this, th ough, th e people th a t were retained by th e Province of Manitoba have been retained at the salary level tha t they were receiving under the ME A. Is that correct ? Mr. Curtis: That is my unde rst and ing, Mr. Chairper son. Mr. Hlckes: The other issue that I would like to discuss is th e whole responsibility of the MEA pertaining to export sales for Manitoba Hydro. MEA had been negotiating for the Province of Manitoba. Is tha t correct ? Mr. Curtis: That is correct . Mr.

Hlckes: Who will be taking that responsibility now? Mr. Curtis: Mr. Chairperson, when the Energy Authority was solely responsible for the contract negot iations, I and several other staff mem bers were involved directly, but at all times we included in the negot iating team memb ers from Manitoba Hydro. The individuals in Hydro who would now have responsi bili ty were also involv ed dur ing th e negot iations tha t were carried out, for examp le, in the Ontario sale agreement . Mr. Hl ckes: How abou t with nonr ene wable resources?

Who is doing th e work on energy conservation and possibly sales for our oil wells and stuff now? Mr. Downey: The responsibilities have gone to the dif ferent de part ment s, Energy and Mines, for example, dealing wit h the nonrenewable resources; I, T and Tf or some of the activities that were formerly carried out. As Mr. Curtis has indicated, some of the staff have gone to different depar tm ents where the different disciplines fall. Mr.

Hlckes: The reason I raise that is that the existence of MEA for quite a few years, with the expert ise th at was involved and with previous negotiations on behalf of the Manitoba government , the contacts and the trust relationships probably would have developed through that. With your negotiators for exp ort sales, has some of tha t expertise been retained to continue on tha t with Manitoba Hydro? Mr. Curtis: I believe it has, Mr. Chairperson.

The one person who had a major role in the negotiations th a t did leave th e Aut hority and has gone to Sa skatchewan, as I have said, worked very closely with Hydro people. There was a very good working relationship. The people who will be involved I am sure in future discussions and negotia tions, have had the ability to work together with the former En ergy Authority staff. • (1 01 5) Mr. Hlckes: With this new team, new approach that has been developed by the government, are there negotiations ongoing now for export sales. Who has the responsibi lity for that? Mr. Downey: Mr.

Chairpe rson, basically th e . responsibilit y lies with Manitoba Hyd ro, as has been indi cated by th e De put y Minister of Fi nan ce. However, any comple t ion of any agreemen t, because the act is still in place, would have to be endorsed by the Energy Authority that is still there. The nego tiations and the sales fall within the responsibilit y of Manitoba Hydro. I can assure the member tha t any opportunit ies tha t are out there are being pursued by Manitoba Hydro.

I believe, as well, it is a responsibility of, whether it is I, T and T, when it comes to promoting the province, or any departmen t, tha t we should be identifying our strengths. One of our strengths as a province certa inly is th e abili ty to produce hydroelectric power. Tha t is being carried out now by basically Manitoba Hydro. Mr. Hlckes: I would just like to follow up tha t comm ent with the whole aspec t of cogeneration.

I had heard talk tha t MEA was going to be looking at cogeneration to look at hydro, diesel, windmill factor and stuff like that to look at conserving some of our energy for export sales . Is that being undertaken now by someone else? Mr. Downey: By Manitoba Hydro. Mr. Hlckes: Manitoba Hydro is actively pu rsuing tha t right now? Mr. Downey: Yes. Mr. Hlckes: The other quest ion I would like to touch on is the whole aspect of Dow Corning, which ME A was very heavily involved in negotiating, setting up. What stage is Dow Corning in right now? Mr. Downey: Mr.

Chairperson, the activit ies that were previously looked after by the Energy Authority are now being handled by I, T and T within the governmen t . Whatever relationships had been previously there with Hydro are still there, but it is I, T and T tha t are carrying them out. They are still in a test situation as it relates to Dow Corning. I know

81 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 there are discussions as to future power rates and the whole expansion of the Dow Corning process. I have had a meeting or two with the Dow Corning people. I am quite encouraged by what I am seeing. Of course, it is a major investment that we ho pe will take place, that will provide further opportunities for Manitoba. We are still in what I would consider a research stage as far as Dow Corning is concerned. There will be further decisions made as the research information is developed. Mr. Hlckes: Could the minister tell us where this researches is taking place? Mr.

Downey: Yes, at Selkirk. Mr. Hlckes: How many empl oyees are there right now in Selkirk? Mr. Downey: I am going by mem ory. This has very little to do with the report we are doing. In general terms, Mr. Chairperson, I think there are some 30 people who are employed at the Dow Corning operation. That is a range. Mr. Hlckes: The reason I raised that is that under the MEA, there were prospects of about 500 jobs being established with Dow Corning under the MEA estimates, so I was just wondering if those same levels of em ployment opportunities are being predic ted by th e new team th at ha s been establ ished.

That is why I was raising that. Mr. Downey: Mr. Chai rperson, it is a research-dem onstration project that is there. The Energy Authority being involved or not being involved will have no im pact as to what the employment levels will reach as it relates to Dow Corning. That will be a corporate decision by Dow Corning as to the work activity that they will carry out at that site. Mr. Hlckes: The other thing that MEA was very heavily involved in was the whole training of the Limestone project.

From my past experience, it helped a lot of aboriginal and northern people to obtain their journeyman tickets, which a lot of them are now utilizing in their own communi ties. With the prospect of Conawapa coming on stream in 19 93, which is only a year away, who will be taking that responsibility on, or will that whole training be just abandoned? * (1 020) Mr. Downey: Mr. Chairperson, again I will make a brief comment about the past. I think that there were some good program s under the Limestone Training activities.

There have been assessments made as to those that have been effective, and I can assure him under the Conawapa Co-ordination Unit, under Manitoba Hydro, the Departm ent of Northern Affairs and all the de partments that are involved that will be in the process are in the process of dev eloping prog rams th at are going to be acceptable, ho pefully, in concert with the native communi ties. I think it is a major component of development, and that again is one of, I think, the major positive things that go along with the Conawapa activity, the abi lity to implemen t training programs for our northe rn peop le.

I know how strongly the member feels about it, and his past experience. As I have said, we believe to pick up the positives from the Limestone Training activities and enhance those, and doing it both through Hydro and through the different depar tments and the co-ord inating commi ttee of governme nt. Let me further add that I think that we have demons trated to date our sincerity about that whole activity when we establis he d the agre ement between Manitoba, Canada and Hydro on the North Ce ntral Hydro development . We are not abandoning or ignoring that componen t.

That has been developed in concert with the commun ities of the northeast area of the province to the ir satisfaction, and an agreement has been signed. I would ho pe we could get the same kind of co-operative activities as it relates to Conawapa . Of course, as the member knows, we need to have the project go through the environmental process, as the North Central is now going through, before a lot of commitments can be made. Again, I am wondering if the member is pushing hard now to put a tr aining program in place prior to environmental hearings.

If he put that on the record, then I would know where he is coming from. Mr. Hlckes: Just to clarify a few comme nts. When I was involved wit h Limestone Training employment agency, there was a lot of great success that came out of it, and also there were some failures. There were not a lot of failures. The member for St. James (Mr. Edwards) says there were a lot of failures. If you measure success by the profit margin of the dollar, then people can say, yes, there were some failures there . If you measure success on the hu man scale, there was a lot of success, because there were a lot of individuals who are now

May 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 82 gainfully empl oyed and have taken very responsible positions within their own home communities, where the member for St . James probably has never been, in a lot of th ose remote communit ies. The success to those communities cannot be measured in dollars and cents. Fo r the member for St . Jam es, Limestone Training emp loyment agency has trained engineers and has trained electrical tradespeople, not like his Leader said, a lemonstone tha t trained only cooks and dishwashers.

Maybe if they got beyond the Perimeter they would know how much of a benefit Limestone was. Beyond that, if you look at the success stories of individuals in northern Manitoba who have great ly benefited from it, one of the glaring errors that was made by MEA was that it was started too late. The reason I say that is tha t when Limestone was being built, th at was when th ey initiated the training programs.

The training was about a year too late in starting because, when you go into a hydro project, if you look at the job descriptions and job orders, the majority of the jobs were third-year, fourth-year apprent ices. There were very, very few that came in as a first-year app rent ice. I would like to ask the minister, in preparation, tha t Conawapa, if it succeeds the environmental imp act hearings and everything else, to ensure th at north erners and nat ive people are ready for employmen t, because it is not wasted training.

Even if you have to delay Conawapa for whatever number of years, individuals now have the skill to fill those job orders from Day One, and not have to wait a year into the project when all the experienced people are brought in from other provinces and who chase all these dam-building project s and never leave the site until the job is finished.

That closes out a lot of opportunities for northern and aboriginal people. • (1 025) I would just like to ask th e minister , in prep aration, to ensure tha t aboriginals and northerners really do get preferential hiring and have the skills in order to come on a job site from Day One and hopefully will keep those jobs if there will be some up-front training to ensure that the aboriginal and northern people are ready. Mr. Downey: Mr.

Chairperson, I appreciate what the member is saying, although I do not want to be presump tuous, that we are doing it not taking into conside ration th e work of th e environ menta l process. I do not want him, the member s of this committee or the memb ers of the Legislat ure to say, well, it is going to proceed regardless of th e hearings. Tha t is not the case. The hearings are a major part of the whole development. I also hear what he is saying about the training programs. It all has to be planned and organized ahead of time.

When the decisions are made, regardless, the people should be preconditioned or ready to take up the opportunities. I accep t th e cri t icism of th e previous administration in not having the program in place. I should not put it that way, and I apologiz e to the memb er. It is not a cri t ic is m, it is an oversight-would we put it that way?-t hat they could have had the training up and running a little sooner than they had. It was not meant to be a criticism. Mr.

Hlckes: No, I did not ta ke it as criticism, because you know that the undertaking of the training agency was the most massive one ever undertaken probably in the whole world. We had people from all over the continent and various countries that came up to review and look at it. There was a lot of support for that. When we look at training programs in northern Manitoba, especially right now, northern Manitoba is suffering greatly. A lot of it is the economy factor and a lack of implem entation of some dollars , probably federal and provincial agreements that have expired.

If you go up into a training program, even if it is geared up for and earmarked for Conawapa, when you look at the training programs that were run under the previous training agency, most of those positions are transferable into either the home community or other northern projects of a smaller nature, or what have you. The training th ese individuals would receive, even if you do not go with Conawapa, will not be lost. You know in those northern communities there is really a lack of highly skilled individuals. That is why I raised that.

It is not just to look at training for Conawapa immedia tely but also to look at the overall northern need, for which the minister also has a responsibility as the Minister of Northern Affairs. That is why I raised that, because he has been in northern commu nities. He knows the conditions of a lot of those houses and the roads and stuff like

83 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 that. It is because of a lack of skilled individuals in those communi ties, and that is all it is, because it costs too much to bring contractors in and out in that area. The other question I have is: Has the minister been in discussions with Keewatin Commu nity College, which was very heavily involved under the MEA agreement with Limestone Training when this government came into power? Has he been involved with the Min ister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) to hopefully look at training needs for future northern projects? Mr. Downey: Mr.

Chairperson, the· Conawapa Co-ordination Unit has the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) sitting on the commi ttee. * (1 030) Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Chairperson, I just want to pursue the line of questioning raised by my colleague the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes). Indeed, he has first-hand experience in terms of northern training. I think his advice to the minister and memb ers of this comm ittee is advice that should be heeded far beyond any of the political commen ts we make at times on Hydro policy and training policy. I notice the member for St. James (Mr.

Edwards), continuing in the great tradition of the Liberal Party on northern issues, knowing not of what he speaks. I would be tem pted to get into a debate, Mr. Chairperson, with the memb er for St. James, but I think that his commen ts indicate how little the Liberal Party has learned in terms of the North, I think in terms of training. We can argue back and forth, and I know the minister has put commen ts on the record in terms of Limestone Training, et cetera, but the fact is, it was a major step forward in terms of the skill level of northerners.

In each and every comm unity in my constituency, and there are eight of them-they range from remote northern affairs comm unities, to reserves, to the city of Thompson-! run into people on a regular basis who went through Limestone Training and are continuing to use the skills that they learned in Limestone Training right in their own comm unity, in each and every com munity, Mr. Chairperson. There is a myth that is propagated sometimes. I know that the memb er for St. James (Mr. Edwards} seems to still be under the cloud of that myth, that somehow the training was completely ineffective in that sense.

The bottom line is, many people have used skills, many people did use it at Hydro, many others, as was very clear right from the start with Limestone Training, used it in the communi ty. I know the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) knows full well, because that was the clear mandate in terms of that. I want to deal with what I see as a gap between Limestone and in terms of Conawapa. I recogni ze that Conawapa is still subject to the environmental hearings. There are questions related to when it will be built even if it passes the environmental hearings.

I do not think it would be any surprise to anyone in this comm ittee to suggest, and I am sure the minister would be one to suggest that in terms of Conawapa that it is actively on the agenda, certainly of Hydro, certainly of the government, has been for a number of years. I mean, there was construction, there were prelimi nary projects underway directly related to Conawapa. In that sense, the bottom line is, Conawapa is certainly on the planning horizon. My concern is as follows in terms of the training, particularly when we see the dismantling of the MEA, which did have a role in terms of training.

I have an interesting perspective in terms of Hydro. I was on the board for a couple of years, and I respect Manitoba Hydro, but Manitoba Hydro did not play a lead role in terms of developing the training for Limestone. It certainly worked co-operatively with the other players, but I remember some of the meetings. I know the memb er for Fl in Ron (Mr. Storie) will rememb er some of the mee tings wher eby Limestone Training was put in place, and Manitoba Hydro has not traditionally played a lead role. That is not its mandate, although it certainly has worked co-operatively with other partners .

I look at the dismantling of the MEA and the shifting of responsibil ities. I look then at what has happened in terms of, what was the Limestone Training authority? Essentially what happened was, it was absorbed by KC C, and the mem ber for Point Do uglas (Mr. Hickes) will remember how difficult that absorption was for many people. I know many very fine people, very fine individuals quit rather than go through the changes that took place. Then what happened essentially was, once KCC had absorbed the former Limestone programs, they went and, because of budget allocations, cut

May 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 84 every la st trades program , for examp le, in Thompso�very last trades program in Thompson. These were the key components ofthe Limestone Training initially. They were a way of keep i ng alive the progress that one needs going through the various levels in apprenticeship. The bottom line is, they eliminated the apprenticeship program s. We raised our concern at the particular point in time. I think, in retrospect, the minister himself would have to admit that was a serious mistake that occurr ed becaus e of shor t-term fi nanc i al considerations.

We now end up in the situation where there really is very little trades tra ining in Thompson and there really is in The Pas. Really the only kind of trades training that has been in place in previous years is the non-Hydro-rel ated level of training. I am just wonderi ng, who is reviewing this in a planni ng sense. How up is the planning horizon? There are var io us dyn ami cs that could see Conawapa move from the stage now where we are seei ng the initial stag es done,

whereas my colleague points out, construction could start in 19 93, and we have no trades training in place. What was there even a couple of years ago has been eliminated. If the ME A now is not going to be involved, is someone lookin g at that, and are we goi ng to see some reinstitution of trades train ing? If the minister wants me to put clearly on the record what I feel as an MLA, and he sort of asked a bit of a cryptic question to the memb er for Po int Do ugl as (Mr. Hi ckes), transpos in g the environmental hearings and the training.

I will say quite clearly, if the minister wants a clear answer, that I beli eve the trades trai ning shou ld be reinstated-period- regardless of what happens in terms of the environmental hear ings. I believe those skills are useful whether it is in terms of Conawapa or whether it is in terms of all owi ng peop le to pr ogress through the apprenticeshi p program as they were previously and being able to use those skills in other northern projects. There are other northern projects underway at the currenttime. There is a continuing need in the North for trained tradespeople.

If the minister wants me to put clearly on the record, and I am sure I speak for all of our northern representatives in our caucus, the bottom line is, that kind of training should be reinstated and it should be reinstated as soon as possible. I want to ask the minister in terms of that whether, through what previously wou l d have been the kind of in put we would have seen from the MEA, that is going to in fact happen, or are we going to have to wait for the environmental hearings? Is that the point at which we are going to see some training reinstated? Mr. Downey: Mr.

Chai rperson, the mem ber's commen ts are helpful . The member, I think, is uncle ar on what he is referring to, that he wants to see, regardless of whether or not it is the ME A, a trai ning program carried out. I can assure him, as I have sa id to the committee as it relates to the North Centra l Hydro activities, that Hydro is prob abl y more involved now than they have been in involving the comm unity people in the work activities, and I compliment them for that. I think some things have been added in recent times, since the mem ber's involvement on the board .

As well , the Conawapa Co-ordination Unit, which has the ministry of Education, I, T and T-1 do not have the total memb ership before me, but it will be directed by myself as the Minister responsibl e for Nor thern Affai rs and Hydro, and work in a co-ordinated way. I appreciate what the member is saying. There is some advance tra ining that probab ly could be advantageous. His commen ts and the member for Point Douglas' (Mr. Hickes) commen ts made here today will be taken into consid eration as it relates to some of the things that he has seen as a member in vol ved with the past Lime stone Tra i ni ng programs.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Ashton, I saw that Mr. Edwards had indicated a desire to question. Before I recognize you, I thought your question before was related to the line of questioning that Mr. Hickes was pursu i ng. Therefore, I recognize d you. If Mr. Edwards has a desire to put a question now, I would recognize Mr. Edwards, if that is the will of the committee. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Ashton can go ahead. Mr. Ashton: I feel I may have forced closure on myself, certainly if the minister has his way, and the member for St. James.

I just wanted to go further, as well, in terms of the whole question of potential northern empl oyment, in terms of future projects. Once aga i n, we had a

85 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 to tall y different structure in term s of Limestone. I mea n obvious ly ME A will no lo nger exist for Conawapa. As the minister has said, there have been changes made within Hydro from the last project. Limestone Training was br ought in. One of the main reasons was the fact that if we had gone thro ugh the traditional system, we probabl y would have been seeing Limestone Training started up this year . It takes a long time through the traditiona l syste ms.

This is no re fl ect ion on com mu nity colleges, but because of the structures they put in place and the kind of approvals that are required, et cetera, it would have ta ken a considerable period of time to put that in place. That is why tha t unique structure was there. • (1 040) There was also a re view of the Nelson-Burntwood Agreement at the time, which strengthened the clauses in terms of northern and native pr eference. As we all know what happened was, as soon as the system was put in place, contractors found ways of gett ing around th e syste m. They found th e lo ophole s.

Even th ough figur es were certainly higher than previous dams and they were monitored and efforts were made to maintain them and they were as high as 40 percent in term s of norther n content, the bottom line is, I think anybody who ever talked to anybody who worked up there knew th at there were abuses.

I am wondering in that regard, and I know I expressed my concer n previously in term s of the Nelson-Burntwood Agreement, the fact th a t it was re newed without any changes, with very little consultation in the North, if the minister can indicate who, first of all, is reviewing the question, what stru cture is reviewing the question of the hiring pr ocess. That includes th e Nelson-Burntwood Agreement; it includes the Canada Employmen t Centre referral process.

Second of all , what consultation, if any, is being undert aken with north ern groups and northern individuals , because they can sure tell you about the proble ms and probably give you a better idea than I about how to fix them? The third is, what plans, if any, are there to revise the hiring procedures? As much as I said be fore that there was progress made on Limestone, the bottom line is, there is a lot more that could be done. I am trying to get some sense once again, since the MEA is no longer going to be a part of this, who is going to be doing this? What consult ation is in pl ace ?

What kind of measures are being contemplated to improve over what happened before rather than see the st atus quo in place or see us go backward s? Mr. Downey: Mr. Chairperson, I do not disagree. The mem ber is saying, improvements can be made. I tried to relate that in my opening comments, that we hope to take the posit ive activities and the ones tha t showed they were successful and continue to build on those, with the addit ion of some new activities as it bo t h relates to training efficiencies and community involvement .

The Conawapa Co-ordi nation Unit are doing some of the wo r k activity and the meeting activity . Hydro as well is doing some meetings with the community people. They are talking to them both I guess on the environmental side but also on the activity. We have, as I said, I think a practical operating activity out there now, or an ex perience with the North Central activit y where Hydro are more involved than they have been in past activities. It will be directly co-ord inated though through the Conawapa Co-ordination Unit of government and working closely with Hydro. That is my intention at this point .

The comments made by the mem ber and the mem ber for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), because of his experience, are important. I think what we all want at the end of the day is, it is a major project , after it has gone through the environmental process and the proper th ings put in place, appr ovals given, but at the end of the day we want to maximize the emp lo ymen t oppo rt un ities for our nort her n communities.

We want to have a skilled and trained work force, not only in the construction activit ies, but through managemen t capabil ities as well for local people, and that as many northern Manitobans as possible can get benefits from the project. As well , I th ink th er e ar e tr emen dous opp ortunit ies fo r the educat ional facilities to play a role. I think there is a tremendous opportunity for industry in Manitoba-s outhern , rural, city-to play a major role. I think a project of tha t magnitude, the whol e country will benefit.

That is why it is so important to make sure there is co-ordination done, whether we are talking industrial offsets, whether we are talking training, whether we are talking a total package of opportunity .

May 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 86 I find, Mr. Chairperson, we may be off the topic of the two last Energy Authority reports . I apologize for that, and I would suggest tha t the work activity tha t was carried out by the MEA as it relates to tr aining will in fact be carried out by other jurisdictions within government , mainly tha t part as the Conawapa Co-ordinat ion Unit of government. Mr.

Ashton: Finally, I just want to indicate to the minister, and I know in the House, in our roles varying as th ey do bet ween governmen t and opposit ion, and he certainly has seen both sides, I have seen bo t h sides, tha t this is one area where I have no difficulty. I know our northern MLAs have no difficulty, our caucus, the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), in not only providing our traditional type of advice to governments-shall we call it const ructive criticism?-but if the minister wants suggest ions on how to improve it, we are not going to play political games stric tly to criticize the government .

I can tell the minister right now, if I had the time I could. I realiz e that we have other things. I know anybody who has had any experience, any contact with Hydro, could tell them a lot of things tha t could be done to strengthen th e training, to strengthen the northern and nat ive involvement . I am quite willing to sit down anywhere, anytime, and I am sure anyone of our caucus who had any exposure to wha t happened before and tell them point by point initiatives that can be taken.

When I say initiatives, I am not talking broad, sweeping things, some very practical things that could be done to make sure we build on what happened with Limestone, where there were some improvements. I can run through the list at any time. I am willing to do it publicly, privately. The concern I have at this point in time is to make sure that we do not try and reinvent the wheel in the first stages, if Conawapa is going to go ahead, th at we learn from the experience of the past.

I throw that out really as an invitation to the minister, and also an invitation to come to th e North, because I know a lot of people who would appreciate the opportunity to talk to him. He is in a unique role there as Minister of Northern Affairs, Minister of Hydro and the Deput y Premier. With his th ree different hats, he pretty well covers everything. I would imagine, Mr. Chairperson, tha t with all the various different portfo lios the minister has, he could probably be a committee of one on Conawapa. I know some people have expressed concern that is essentially wha t is happening.

He is in a position where he needs to hear the suggestion and advice. I would like to invit e him at any opport unity to come to the North, and this is in a to tally nonpartisan way, to be able to sit down with northerners from whom I have learned and received a lot of very good advice. That is a standing invitation to either meet with us as mem bers of the Legislat ure or to come up north and talk to people and to do it, I would hope, fairly soon. No one can predict the future.

We do not know what is going to happen with the environmenta l assessment or if there are going to be any other changes, although I th ink we have a fairly good sense of where the timetable is headed. My sense is tha t we do not have th a t much time in a planning sense with Conawapa, given the gov ernment 's current planning agenda on it. I would suggest we sit down fairly soon and, as I said, that is an open invit ation. Mr.

Chairperson: I would like to remin d all members of the committee that in light of the fact tha t the minister is wearing numerous different hats that we keep our vision under the hat of the Energy Authority at this stage of the game and around this table. I would ask them to direct their questions and comments to the operat ions of the Energy Authority. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairperson, firstly, I do not want to ask numerous quest ions on Conawapa as my friends have in the other party. It is no surprise th at th ey have ta ken offe nce to some of my comments in the past and appear defensive again here today.

They have a lot to be defensive about. Mr. Chairperson, I notice the indication from the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) and the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) that they were succes sful in th eir tr aining progr ams wit h Limestone. Let me just say, and I will not go into great detail, that anyone who looks at the abysmal failure of those training programs compared to what they could have been understands the failure of the New De mocratic Party and their willingness to sacrifice effect ive training for many more people in northern Manitoba for polit ical reasons.

By bumping that developm ent ahead two years purely for the 19 86 election, they squandered and sacrificed an opportunity which they know was there in spades. I do not think that one has to go into

87 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 much dept h to understand the reality of tha t situation and what they did in northern Manitoba. * (1 050) Mr. Chairperson, I know as well that there is great div ision in th e ND P caucus on th e is sue of Conawapa, and for good reason as well, because I th ink, as the min ister points out, there is this dilemma tha t they face with respec t to northern dev elo pmen t in respec t of respec t ing th e environmen t and th at proce ss, whic h is a time-consuming environment which they purport to support.

At th e same time they know from experience that the pushing ahead of these matters for the purposes of polit ical reasons can and has been done in the past. They are the people who in many respects ha ve left a legacy which I suspect this government is seeking to duplicate in Conawapa. Mr. Chairper son, I want to ask the minister, specific to the major expendit ure of the Manitoba Ener gy Authority in the las t years, which ha s been the Dow Corning project, there is an indication in the report that there was to have been const ruction in the fall of 19 91 .

I believe that was the indication in th e 19 91 repor t. Page 4 in dica t ed th at th e ground-breaking ceremony for the pilot plant facility took place on October 15 , 19 90, and construction is expected to be compl eted in late 19 91 . Was it in fact completed in late 199 1 7 Mr. Downey: Yes, Mr. Chairperson. Mr. Edwards: Can th e minister in dicate what exactly th e facility th a t was com pleted is and whether or not it is being used at this point to its full capacity? Mr. Downey: Mr. Chai rper son, it is a te st opera tio n.

There is new te chn ology being introduced at this plant which is owned by the Dow Co rnin g com pany . If th e te sts prove to be successful , th ere is a pl an, following certain agreements having to be reached, to further expand it to make it a fully com mercially operational activity. It has to be viable, but it is new technology tha t is usi ng certain high uses of hydroelectric power, which are part of the process. Given the fact tha t the dem onstration project proves successful as to what it was intended to do and all thin gs comi ng to geth er, it would be expanded into a commer cial ope ration. Mr.

Edwards: When might we ha ve an answer on whether or not this is going to go forward to the developm ent tha t we foresaw when we first entered this arrangement ? Mr. Downey: Mr. Chair pe rson, I have been informed th at it was anticipated probably a two-year dem onstration project which would continue to be tha t kind of an activity plant, that the plant would continue to be a demons tration project and, if successful, would flow from that a separate and new ope ration which we would anticipate, aga i n having all things being conside red, that it would be built here in Manitoba.

That is what we have been building towards with the Dow Corning compa ny. Mr. Edwards: The annual report indicates funding arrangement s over a number of years and the amounts that are to be committed and further indicates that the repaym ent obligations of Dow Corning are by no means secure in the sense that there are various conditions which have to be met before they repay, bo t h in terms of the amounts that they would have to repay as well as over what period of time.

Can the minister indicate whether or not at this point it appears th at Manitoba will recoup the investm ents tha t it has made, whether or not the prosp ect is good that in fact th e repaymen t obligations of Dow Corning will be met? Mr. Downey: Mr. Chairperson, probably to make sure th at the information is totally accurate, I would thin k tha t now that it has been turned over to the Department of Ind ustry, Trade and Tourism, some of th ose detailed questions relating to the current situation would probably be more appropria tely asked of the Minister of I, T and T. (Mr. Stefanson).

That is who now is responsib le for the negotiated agreement between what was developed between the Energy Authority and Dow Corning. I thin k it would be more appro priate for those questions to be put to the Minister of I, T and T. My only comment would be one of obse rvation at this point, not dealing with the actual agreement or the repayment, that from what I ha ve seen and he ard, I am encouraged by the activities that are going on there as it relat es to the government 's position.

I cannot make a specifi c judgmental call as it relates to the agreement and the repayment and th e negotiate d agr eemen t between Do w Corning and the government, which is now being handled by I, T and T.

May 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 88 Mr. Edwards: The memb er for Fl in Fl on (Mr. Storie) raised in his commen ts on the bill put forward by the member for Crescentwood what he perceived to be a problem , which was that other departments could not dup licate or could not take over the ma ndate of the Energy Authority. It has been indicated that the Dow Corning arrangement has now gone to I, T and T. Can the minister indicate what other parts of the mandated operations of the Energy Authority have gone to other departments or to Manitoba Hydro?

Can he indicate where other responsibil ities have been allocated? Mr. Downey: Mr. Chairperson, the additional ones from I, T and T, as I have indicated earlier; Hydro, as it relates to hydro sales, although the Energy Authority, because the act is still in place, has to endorse it because again the authority is still there under

an act of the Legisl ature; Energy and Mines, as it rel ates to anything dealing with the nonelectrical activities. The prom otional side of the sale of hydroelectric power, as I said earlier, lays in two areas, with Manitoba Hydro but, also, the marketing and promotiona l area within I, T and T. Basically the three areas are Manitoba Hydro, as it relates to the sale of hydro; I, T and T, as it relates to Dow Corning and the promotional side of energy activity in the province; and Energy and Mines, as it relates to the nonel ectrical activities. Mr. Edwards: Mr.

Chair person , it is always interesting to hear the New Democratic Party, in particular the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), on this issue defend inefficient government, which is what he does in his speech. He talks about the government not being able to operate and move quickly , being tied down, government tending to move slowly, and these are the reasons for the Energy Authority.

He talks about the inability of government to act in the best interests of the province when it comes to utilization of the energy-t hat is his quote from his May 23, 19 91 , speech-and that the gov ernment has very little capacity remaining in the Departm ent of Energy to do any of the things that the Energy Authority is doing or was doing.

Similar to their position on the City of Winnipeg, the New De mocratic Party appears to excuse inefficient, ineffective government in favour of keeping separate organizations involved like the Manitoba Energy Authority, which are duplicitous and in fact redundant if government is doing its job. * (1 10 0) They do not say government should improve. They do not say government should become effective and efficient. What they say is, Jet us just create more levels to do the same thing.

It is interesting that the defence of the Energy Authority is a criticism of government, in fact, for not doing what it is supposed to be doing. The member for Fl in Fl on also indicates, in response to the member for Inkster , he wants to teach us a bit of experience about gov ernment. Well, if the member for Ain Ron's governme ntal experience is Jacking on my part or on the member for Inkster's part, I will accept that criticism gladly. I hope never to have the government experience that the memb er for Ain Flon had as an inefficient and ineffective government. He certainly wrote the book on that, Mr.

Chairperson. In the last year, since the Energy Authority has been transferred to the other departments, what has the experience been in the sense of the abil ity to carry out the mandate of the Energy Authority? Has there been a working group in place which is overseeing that? Has this been the subject of discussion at the cabinet level to ensure that the mandate is effectively dealt with in other areas? Mr. Downey: Mr. Chairper so n, I guess the member is giving me the opportunity to judge the operations of government .

I would just say that in my term as the Minister of Energy and Mines that to date I am satisfied that the areas of responsibil ity that were previously with the Energy Authority are being carried out and hand l ed responsibly, that there is a capacity within the different depa rtments to do so. The discussion and comm ents as they relate to the Conawapa-Hydro training program, we are in the process right now of looking at. Again, I do not want to be sitting here in comm ittee saying that we are going forward with a Conawapa training program when in fact we have not done the environmental work.

I am listening to what the New De mocratic Party are saying though. They said that they should have probably started their Limestone Training program a year earlier than they did, and of course that, I said, was worthy of paying attention to. Again, I do not want to put myself in a position for open criticism as

89 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 to advancing a particular part of a project tha t still ha s to go through a review process. I th ink the member can appreciate that, being a politician. He may want to even make comment on that. I say, from my obse rvation and from the obser vation I think generally, the activities that were previously being carried out under the Energy Authority are now being ha ndled within the different depa rtmental jurisdictions quite capably. Mr.

Edw ards: I apprecia te th e mi nis te r's commen ts and certainly agree tha t we have to understand the environmental consequences, both ph ysical and hu man, before we invest large sums of money and do th ings in north ern Manitoba that we do not completely understand the consequences of when we do it. Of course we have again the legacy of the ND P to teach us essentially how not to go about northern developm ent without any environmental review at all. I certa inly agree with th e ND P's own self-criticism tha t they did not start the training program soon enough.

In fact , they started the dam two years ahead of sche dule and, as I have sugges te d earlier, quite pate ntly abused th eir governmental authority for polit ical purposes and sacrificed jobs and training in the North. I do not deny th a t there are benefits to the training being felt in the communities. The point is that the ben efits th a t ha ve been achieved are woefully ben eath what could have been achieved had the NDP governmen t of th e day not pushe d the Limestone dam ahead for their polit ical purposes, namely the 19 86 election. Mr.

Chairperson, with those comments , I look forward to hearing some of the other comments from the commi ttee. Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Chairperson, I first want to congratulate th e member for St. James for reading my speec h es so car eful ly. It is unfortunate that he ha s not been instructed by them. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. St orie, could I interject? Could you pull your mike up just a bit closer yet? Thank you. Mr. Storie: Th ank you for remi nding me. I certainly would not want the member for St . James not to have access to my words on this occasion either. Mr. Chairperson, the member for St.

James I guess can be forgiven for some of his apparent ignorance on the issue of Limestone and Limestone development and the training. I recogniz e tha t the member for St. James was not a memb er of the Legislature at the time and was not a part of the debate that went on around tha t project. I th ink my colleague for Point Do uglas has outlined some of the successes of the training program th rough th e Limesto ne Training and em ployment agency. The member for St . James says he was no t a member. The member for St.

James may ha ve forgotten tha t he was the director ofthe Limestone Training and employm ent agency. He is quite familiar with both its successes and its failures. Mr. Chairperson, I would be the first to admit tha t we could ha ve done things better. The fact is tha t we ha ve had several other experiences with Hydro construction projects where we employed virtually no northern aboriginal people. We did much better in te rms of emp loying people and in terms of struct uring training programs to allow north erners to be participants in this than previously.

I hope tha t wh atever gov ernmen t cont inu es with hy dr o developm ent will learn from both the successes and the failures, and I am not sensitive ab out it at all. However, I think an objective view of Limestone and the training program would indicate that it had been successful, by and large. I always refer to one resident expert at the Free Press who ha s never been known to be sympathe t ic to the New Democratic Party, nor, while the Tories were in op posi t ion, I sh ould say, to hydro developmen t , Mr.

Cleverley, who took it upon hi mself, and I give hi m credit for this because he is seldom well researched, but he did go to Thompson and consulted with not only the training authority, but th e com muni t ies, communi ty lea ders in Thompson, and came back and wrot e a glowing report of the Limestone Training and employment agency. Mr. Cleverley and I seldom agree on anyth ing, but certainly I agreed with his review of the agency and its success- not pe rfect. Mr. Chairperson, moving to the Manit oba Energy Auth ority and th e concern ex pressed by the member for St . James (Mr.

Edwards) tha t somehow my thoughts tha t governments were inefficient or could not respond in a quick enough manner was some ho w a crit icism of govern men t . It is a recogni t ion th at govern men ts ope rate quite

May 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 90 diff erently than private corporations or, in this case, a Crown corporation with considerable authority. Governments have a process to follow which can be time consuming and cumbersome. It is that way out of nec es sit y if you want to main tain accountability. You have to receive Treasury Board approvals. You have to receive appr ovals for staffing and staff increasing and expendi tures of one sort and another.

I guess what is interesting in the case of MEA in the decision to disband MEA was that it was the Tory government that created the Manitoba Energy Authority. The previous minister, the Lyon Minister of Energy, the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro, was responsible for creating the Manitoba Energy Authority, Mr. Chairperson and, at the time, it was a good idea. The minister wants to say publicly now that everything is sort of business as usual and that those initiatives that were started by the MEA are now being carried out by the departments. I think that the evidence is quite the contrary.

If you look at the role that MEA has played since 1 979, you will find that they have been involved in many major hydro and hydro-related projects, including the development of the concept of a western power grid, which the Lyon government proposed and in fact would have us believe, and it may be true, that we are working toward an agreement that would have involved a major power sharing among the western prairie provinces. The MEA was involved in that. * (1 11 0) The MEA also obviously was instrumental in signing the Northern States Power agreement.

It was involved and has been involved in four or five other significant Hydro agreements, diver sity exchanges with NSP; power sales to Minnesota; the major agreement with Ontario. I guess my question to the minister is: What is on the horizo n? Since ME A es sential ly was responsible for concluding the Ontario Hydro sale, what has Manitoba Hydro been doing? We have heard very little of the next generation of opportu nity. I point out to the minister that the success that the MEA and the government had in 19 84 in signing a deal with Northern States Power was based on years and years and years of effort.

Manitobans are looking now to the mid-1990 s and saying, where is this government going? Are we going to see any future sales? Are we going to see the resale now of perhaps power that we saved from conservation efforts? I mean we have a whole truckload of opportunities. I do not think I, T and T understands hydro well enough or the intricacies of power sales to be very effective in promoting energy-intensive industries, at cetera.

I am not sure that Manitoba Hydro has a sufficiently strong mand ate through The Manitoba Hydro Act to give it the authority to go out and be aggressive and to promote sales that are profitable for Manitoba. In fact if you look strictly at The Manitoba Hydro Act, you will find that their mandate does not even me ntion the prospect of export-for-profit sales; their mandate is to provide hydro at the lowest possible cost. One can interpret that to mean, well, go out and make a profitable deal so you can keep the rate structure reasonable.

The Manitoba Energy Authority had a different mandate, a more straightforward mandate, and that is to move to have Manitoba benef it from our energy pote ntial, and I think that this is a mi stake. Obviously the people of Manitoba will only know how great a mistake or whether it was a mistake when we see whether in fact there are any new hydro export sales, whether there are any new ini tia tives tha t come for ward in terms of energy-intensive industries. To start with, what sort of projects is Manitoba Hydro now working on?

What prospects are out there for futur e dev elopm ent re lated to energy-intensive industries or firm power export sales? If they are not there, if the minister cannot provide some examples, then I say this is a serious, serious mistake. I guess we are here to bury ME A. I think perhaps we should attempt to resuscitate it if the minister cannot give us some assurance that these other things that are supposedly going to happen are actually happening. Mr. Downey: Mr. Chairperson, I do not intend to enter into a debate .

I think we probably have some of the same objectives as memb ers of the Legislature and as residents of Manitoba as to, first of all, recognizing the importance of Manitoba Hydro in the role that it has previously played and to the future role that it can play in the overall economic sti mulus of our provi nce , not only with the construction of the facilities, but the product that it

91 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 produc es, both for potential export sales and equally for maxim izing its use here in the province of Manitoba. The member referred to a bit of history when he referred to the western power grid. We started the initiative under the Lyon admini stration, which he referred to. It for some reason did not proceed. Again, I have no expla nation for it, and he did not offer one but, again, he referred to it as one of the things that the Energy Authority was responsible for. Also the diversity agreeme nts-M r.

Curtis referred earlier to the fact that all the negotiations and discussions that were carried out with these power sales, the people within Hydro were very much a part of, they were not working as two separate bodies within government and one at Hydro, that that capabili ty is still there. He quite frankly is raising a question which I am dealing with right now as the Minister responsible for Energy and Hydro as to how we can maximize our position in this country as it relates to using Hydro as a positive growth factor. I am doing that. I am not doing it ignoring the Manitoba Hydro board .

That is not my job to impose my wishes. It is a matter of through consultation as to how we best co-ordinate ourselves. There may well be some closer liaison, a mechanism that should be considered, that we still have the energy act on the books. The purpos e that it may carry out in the future may look somewhat different than it currently is. The bottom line is, though, I think that he is getting to is that there are opportunities out there, and what mechanism are we using to develop those opportunities?

I can assure him, because I realize how important it is to the province, that we do just that, we get ourselves in a developmental position, a marketing position, to not only sell the power capacity that can be saved through conservation, but we are certainly positioned as it relates to the rest of this country with hydroelectric prices. These were not our number s, but about two weeks ago there was an

article in The Globe and Mail which put Manitoba as No. 1 in energy pricing in this country. We feel very good about that, and I guess what we are looking at is a marketing strategy and how that can best be carried out. I can assure the member that I am quite conscious of the fact that there are opportunities that well will come our way, and we have to be out there promoting th em. Mr. Storie: The minister's last commen t is the basis for my concern. The minister says there are opportunities out there and they will come to us.

The point was that MEA was supposed to go out there and create the interest in Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro and our energy advantage. I appreciate the fact, and we have certainly tried to sell the province, I am sure as the minister has, on the basis that we have the lowest book rates of any province in the country and most jurisdictions around the world. The problem is that the minister did not provide the record with any concrete examples of what is next.

I mentioned five or six different projects that MEA was involved in and, although Hydro officials were involved and Hydro has obviously a great deal of expertise in terms of the cost of production and the cost of sale of power, the fact is that MEA very often was the aggressor in terms of going down there, finding people, knocking on doors and sitting down and saying, we are here and we have got something to sell. Hydro was instrumental in making sure that when the negotiations were ongoing that it made sense for Manitoba Hydro.

I think we are losing that and, as I mentioned befor e, of the power sales that we talked about, Manitoba Energy Authority was also involved in bringing Brown-Boveri here to work with Federal Pioneer, a E uropean company involved in the Dow Corning situation, involved in meeting with a whole series of Jap anes e companie s, for example. Mr. Curtis, who was the chair and who is still actively involved, was very instrumental in those meetings and in trying to secure investment from other areas into Manitoba to help us use our energy advantage. I would like the minister to be a little mor e concrete.

I can tell the minister at least a half a dozen things that MEA was directly involved with when MEA was up and working as an aggressive agency out promoting Manitoba's interests. The minister has now been involved for four years. Can he tell me anything new? Well, I am sorry, the minister has only been involved in his role as Manitoba Hydro and MEA minister for a shorter period, but this government has had four years to use the authority to its advantage. Other than projects that were started by the MEA while the NDP were in governme nt, I have not heard anything new, and I would like to hear

May 5, 1992 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 92 something new. I think the people of Manitoba would like to hear something new. • (1 12 0) Mr. Downey: Mr. Chairperson, two things-since I have been minister, which has been a short period of time, let me assure him that I am interested in maximizing Manitoba's capabil ity and its potential through hydro production and the low cost of power that it is, the clean, efficient type of power that it is. I can tell him there are two things that I have done as it relates to Hydro with the chairman of Hydro or with the president of Hydro.

That has been to meet with the ministry of Energy in Saskatchewan to look at what potentials there may be in considering further use or sale of hydro to Saskatchewan through probably picking up on the old power grid concept, not necessarily a power grid per se, but again talking to them as a potential opportunity. Of course the MOU that was developed between I, T and T and the ministry from Saskatchewan as well included the discussions as it related to energy. I think that makes sense.

Let me as well say that we have, with the company of Manitoba Hydro, met with the mining industry in Toronto several weeks ago, again presenting the Manitoba Hydro story taking the same opportunity. I cannot lay before him any imme diate concrete results, but I can tell you that we are not sitting back not presenting ourselves to the other jurisdictions.

It is my intent to develop a strategy working with the Minister of I, T and T, who has the promotional responsibilities that were with the Manitoba Energy Authority and with Manitoba Hydro, rememb ering again that it is not our intent to politically be involved in it to the extent that we would be accused of political interference, but it is our intent to maximize the potential that Hydro has. Again there is a mechanism within I, T and T that is there. There is the opportunity that I have referred to to directly meet, through my involvement as Minister responsible for Hydro and Energy, with other jurisdictions.

I say that the whole process of negotiating and selling hydro has been with Manitoba Hydro as part of the overall activity. They know what they have to sell and they have carried out that responsibility with the MEA. They now have that responsibility as Manitoba Hydro. I am not debating with him. I am not criticizing his questions. What I am saying is that it is being dealt with and I hope in as efficient a manner as possible.

There may well be a need for some additional promotional activity to be done, and I thank the member for his support in moving in that direction, because I intend to move in that direction without the Manitoba Energy Authority as it was previously structured. I think we can promote hydro, do these things without the Manitoba Energy Authority as we have seen it in the past. Mr. Stori e: Well, I am sur e it would be disconcerting if Manitobans knew that the minister could not tell me today what projects were on stream. What new projects are out there?

I have said, I can mention probably half a dozen more if the min ister wants, including discussions that were going on with aluminum companies like Alumax. Without ME A I am not sure that those negotiations are going to be pursued. The minister mentioned Saskatchewan. In 19 87, I wrote a letter to the Minister of Energy in Saskatchewan offering them a power deal that would have saved them millions and millions of dollars, provided them with power at a fraction of the cost that is going to be produced from their Shand project, whatever they call it.

I think there is some opportunity there for Man itoba to supp ort a neighb our and crea te a win-win situati on. I encourage the minister to go and do it. I am just concerned that Manitoba Hydro get so concerned with , and rightly so, the effi cient operation of the system, that they do not really take this other mandate seriously to the extent they have that mandate, even by legislation. I think that the fact the minister cannot say, yes, here is what we are working on, and this looks really good, is of some concern, I think, to the memb ers of the committee.

I will say that I am heartened by the fact the minister refers to the fact that the legislation is still in place and that the ME A could be reconstituted at some point in the future. I think we are being too lax and perhaps that is not the fault of this minister. I hope he is serious in his role as Minister of Energy and Mines and Minister responsible for Hydro in getting some of these projects on stream. I can assure him that sitting passively waiting for someone to come to his door is not going to be successful in the 19 90s. The minister talked about, Manitoba Hydro has always been selling power.

I remind the minister

93 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA May 5, 1992 that prior to 19 80, prior to the formation of the Manitoba Energy Authority, Manitoba did not have a long-term firm power sale. We were exporting short-term power, surplus power. Yes, we were probably losing money on that power, although it is surplus. We wer e not me eting our cost of production per kilowatt, is what I meant to say. The firm power sales are the way to go, and before MEA there were none. Now we have three, at least three. I do not know whether that is coincidence or a reflection of the fact that MEA worked.

The minister cannot tell me of anything else that is going on that would lead me to believe that we have reason for opti mism about the future of export sales and energy-intensive industries coming to the province. I would like to be optimistic. I would like to have the minister list me a dozen things that we are working on or things that are immi nent. The government has had four years, and it has been four years of pretty much sitting on their hands, if the minister's lack of response is any indication. I do not think that is good enough. I did not want this to turn into a lengthy debate either, Mr.

Chairperson. I realize the government has made its decision on MEA. I hope that the minister will be able to prove me wrong about my contention that this is a mistake. I am sure he will, but certainly nothing the minister said dissuades me from making those commen ts once again at this comm ittee meeting. He has certainly not given me any substantial evidence to make me change my mind. Mr. Downey: Again, I am not going to prolong the de bate. I am qui te prepared to pass it, Mr. Chairperson.

I take seriously the comments the member has made, and I can tell him just in an area of I, T and T, and he will be able to ask questions as it relates to again, the promotional activities that are going on there. The individuals that were with the Manitoba Energy Authority are with I, T and T, and I am informed that they will be carrying out some of the same promo tional activities throug h that department. Promotion is still taking place. I would like to see, as well, additional promotion taking place. Mr. Storie: I am sorry, I cannot leave that. Mr.

Chairperson, 19 87 I believe was the last year that I was involved with a promotional tour partly sponsored by the Man itoba Energy Authority. Obviou sly, investm ent tours, as the min ister probably knows, are expensive. It would be interesting to know whether in fact I, T and T has arranged anything since 19 87. My concern is that it is longer-term investment, making these kinds of decisions is longer term and the departments have a lot more trouble justifying it sometimes. That is what I meant when I said this agency is much more focused and it responds more quickly.

If it has an opportunity to go to Japan and meet with someone tomorrow, it can say, well, let us spend $25,000, where a department cannot do that necessarily. If it is not budgeted, they go through a whole process to find that money. That is why I said it was kind of a useful tool in that sense, not that it was spending mon ey mindlessly, not then and I am sure not since, but it has its advantages. • (1 13 0) Although the staff may be in I, T and T, the process they have to go through to organize these things is so long term that I think sometimes they are inefficient, ineffective. That is my comment. Mr.

Hlckes: I have a couple of questions. I was raising the issue about the staff that were part of ME A that have been reallo cated within the government. Could I get a copy of the positions and the salaries they were at when they left the MEA and what salaries they are at now? Mr. Downey: Yes, we can provide that, Mr. Chairperson. Mr. Hlckes: Just in closing, I would just like to clear up any misunderstand ings pertaining to Limestone Training Agency. We have never, ever indicated for one instance that it was perfect.

I mentioned earlier that it was the first under taking of that size anywhere, and there had been some mistakes, but there have been quite a few successes. I would just like to remind the Liberal Party that if they were keeping track of hydro projects in northern Manitoba, the previous project to Limestone, there was only a 9 percent aboriginal participation on that dam.

With Limestone and with the initiative of the training program to ensure that people had the skills and the qualifications to work on that dam and with the preferential hiring clause, there was a 25 percent participation of aboriginal workers on that site

May 5, 1992 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 94 maintained throughout the project. When I say ma intai ned, at various stages of the project sometimes they went much higher than that, but it was 25 percent. If you look at 9 percent and increased it from one project to 25 percent, that is almost triple. If I understood the mem ber for St. James (Mr.

Edwards) when he responded that it was a waste of a lot of money, I for one and my party do not agree that you waste money when you train aboriginal people to increase their emp loyment opportunities from 9 percent to 25 percent and you triple the opp ort unities for aboriginal people with the participation of those training programs, which will be ongoing for the rest of their lives. That is a successful program to me. We are committed to aboriginal people, and I most certainly am comm itted to aboriginal people to pursue their careers.

If the Liberal Party is not in agreement with that by some of their statements, I say shame, because aboriginal people have been asking for job op portu nities and ed ucation opportu nities for years and years. With the Limestone Training this was one opportunity that was given to aboriginal people to pursue meaningful careers and meaningful job opportunities for the rest of their lives.

If you are going to start looking at the success again of individual people's lives and compare it to the success of a program on the profit margin instead of looking at the result of the human resources that are put into comm unities and the benefits that the whole fam ily and the comm unity share by a person succeeding in their own careers, I say shame again to the member for St. James for making those statements. On that note, I would just like to thank the staff and the minister for the opportunity to discuss here.

I would encourage the minister to look at an up-front training program , and not only is it for Conawapa. Anyone who says that up front it is straight for Conawapa does not unde rstand the northern needs. Any training program that the government or anybody initiates in northern Manitoba today will benefit all the communi ties and will be nefit aboriginal people mostly because of the lack of opportu nities in the past. So it does not have to necessarily be just a Conawapa training program.

It should be a training program for northerners and aboriginal people to continue on with their careers and responsibilities that they have to th eir families and their comm unities. So I would just like to thank you for that. Mr. Chairperson: Shall the 199 0 and 1991 reports of the Manitoba Energy Authority be passed-p ass. Committee rise. COMMITTEE ROSE AT: 11 :35 a.m.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-3-punr4
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 3rd hansardpdf punr4.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	23357bb6f031867b222545732369600084c0e329

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