Manitoba Hansard — 10 October 1989 (Sitting 46, 34th Legislature, 2nd Session)

34-2-46

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, October .10, 1989. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCE EDINGS INTRODUCTION OF BILLS BILL NO. 55-T HE CROWN CORPOR ATI ONS PUBL IC REV IEW AND ACCOUNT ABILITY AMENDMENT ACT Mr. John Angus (St. Norbert) introduced, by leave, Bill No. 55, The Crown Corporations Public Review and Accountability Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'examen public des corporations de la Couronne et !'obligation redditionnelle de celles-ci. � MOTION presented. Mr. Angus: Mr. Speaker, the Bill is designed to correct some faulty legislation that will require that Manitoba Hydro place before the Public Utilities Board for review-the distinction being not decision, but for review-prior to any commitment by the Government to invest in these mega projects.

It encourages the Hydro to put all of the facts, as to the cost benefits, the time frames, the schedules, of the proposed development before a commitment is made by the Government, and leaves to the Government to determine the level of mega projects. Mr. Speaker, I think that it is a reasonable Bill which was overlooked in the first and original drafting of the Bill which was submitted to the House. I think it is something that the chairman of the Hydro Board and the Government Members have suggested that they are willing to do. It simply clarifies a piece of legislation.

I think it is in the best interests of all Manitobans. Thank you. QUE STION put, MOTION carried. INTRODUCT ION OF GUES TS Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions, may I direct Honourable Members' attention to the gallery where we have from the St. Adolphe School, thirty-two Grade 9 students under the direction of Mr. Dufort. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Albert Driedger). Also with us this afternoon we have 19 visitors from the Human Justice Training Programme, under the direction of Mr. Dennis Scott-Herridge.

On behalf of all Honourable Members, we welcome you here this afternoon. *

(1335) ORAL QUEST ION PERIOD Ta xicab Drivers Protective Shields Mrs. Shar on Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister responsible for Highways and Transportation (Mr. Albert Driedger). Taxicab drivers, and certainly those in the Liberal Caucus, were very much appreciative of the comments made this morning by the Minister with respect to the compulsory nature of safety shields in taxicabs. Can the Minister inform the House when the implementation of a compulsory program of safety shields will be implemented in the Province of Manitoba? Hon.

Albert Driedger (Mi nister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, let me first of all once again express deep regrets at the tragic murder that took place with a taxicab driver a little while ago. The funeral is at 1:30 this afternoon. The Committee on Taxi Driver Safety and Health of the Advisory Council on Workplace Safety and Health, chaired by Wally Fox-Decent, recommended in February of 1987 that safety shields be mandatory in taxicabs.

The Government of the Day implemented that recommendation and a few days later changed that recommendation, based on the concern that was forwarded by the Workplace Safety and Health people, as well as the Driver Vehicle Registration Department, about the safety and concern for the passengers in the back. Subsequent to that, it was left optional. However, based on the fact that three taxicab drivers have been murdered in the past four years, it is the intention of this Minister and this Government to implement mandatory safety shields in taxicabs. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to indicate that I make that announcement here today with one proviso, that a safety shield can be designed to protect the safety of the passengers in the back. In terms of the time element, I have to indicate I have instructed the Taxicab Board to report, on the question of adequacy of shield designs available, to me within 60 days. Mrs. Carstairs: We thank the Minister for that response. In light of the fact that Boston has a compulsory shield program, we are sure he can come up with the right design. Protective Shields -Loan Program Mrs.

Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): I have a supplementary question to the Minister. Can the Minister tell us if his program of implementing this will include an interest-free loan program, making easy payments by owners of taxicabs so they can be up and running with such a program as soon as it is implemented by this Government? 1684

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 Hon. Alb,rt Driedger (Minis ter of Hig hways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, it has not been the policy of Government in the past, when regulations of this nature get brought forward, that the Government pay for that. I would like to indicate, if there is concern about the cost implications, until we know the cost of the design, we do not really know what costs are involved at that stage of the .game.

Once that comes forward, and there are provisions under The Taxicab Board Act to be able to make application for the taxicab industry to make application, then the Taxicab Board will deal with all the costs that are involved with the running of a taxicab operation. Mrs. Carstairs: We are not talking about the Government buying the shields. We are asking for interest free loans to make it possible for owners to buy the shields immediately so there will not be any putting off of an essential safety mechanism for them. Safety Training Program Mrs.

Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): I. have a final supplementary question on this issue to the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Albert Driedger). Can the Minister tell the House today if he has reviewed the compulsory training program of safety drivers, and if he can tell the House how much time presently is dedicated to the safety aspects of cab drivers throughout this training? Hon. Albert Driedger (Minis ter of Highw ays and Transportation): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to indicate that the Taxicab Board is in the process of establishing a driver safety review committee, with representation from owners, drivers, users, police, the board and Government to consider various measures to improve driver safety, including safety shields, drop safes, better emergency lights, better alarm and response systems that is something that is very sens itive-driver controlled rear door locks and emergency vehicle location systems. Mrs.

Carstairs: The one item on the list was the question I posed, which was, will he review the training program of drivers so we know they are adequately trained in use of safety? *

(1340) Free Trade Agreement Motor Vehicle Regulations Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposit ion): I have a new question to the Minister of Highways and Transportation. Last year, when Members opposite defended the Free Trade Agreement, we received assurances that the agreement would have no effect on the health and safety of Canadians. Now we learn that in order to comply with the agreement, the federal Government will have to sanction the use of unsafe vehicles on our roads.

A recent decision by the federal Government to disregard its own safety regulations will open the border to used vehicles which are unsafe according to Canadian standards. My question to the Minister is: what action did he take to oppose the federal Government's decision to waive the motor vehicle regulations? Hon. Albert Driedger (Minis ter of Hig hways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I have some difficulty with that question for the simple reason that under the trucking deregulation that is taking place across the country right now in conjunction with that a National Safety Code was established.

Manitoba has implemented with the exception of one or two all the implementations that are required under the National Safety Code including the inspection aspect of it. Any vehicle that comes into this province will be inspected. If they are not safe they will not be allowed to drive on our highways. Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, we realize the Minister does not have to answer the questions, but we would like him to even be in the same area. We are talking about automobiles crossing the border . � Mr.

Speaker, what is this Minister prepared to do, in that the federal Govern ment has reduced the standards, to ensure that imported vehicles crossing the border from the United States to Canada under the Free Trade Agreement meet our safety standards. Mr. Albert Driedger: Well, addressing the automobiles aspect of it, we have spot inspections that are taking place right now. We have inspectors out there, with as many as we can muster, that are doing the inspections on vehicles. If they are not safe, then they have to comply or take their vehicles off the road. Mrs. Carstairs: The standards have been reduced.

They were reduced by a federal Government that said safety standards were not in jeopardy in this country, yet we have just discovered that they are in jeopardy as soon as the Americans tweak their ears. We want to know from this Minister what he is going to do to ensure that vehicles crossing from the United States to Canada meet Manitoba safety standards. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I indicated before that we have our spot safety checks that we do on cars. If they are not safe they are not allowed to drive. They have to get them improved. That will continue. We are very concerned.

The one thing that I and this Government have always been concerned about is the safety on our highways of our vehicles and of our roads, and we will continue to do that. If further action is required, I can assure Members of this House that we will take that kind of action. Rheumatologists Shortages Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposit ion): Mr. Speaker, in November of 1988, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) received a brief dealing with the crisis with rheumatology and people suffering from arthritis 1685

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 in the province. The Minister received a brief and was made aware of the very serious and deteriorating situation for those types of patients, something I am sure that everyone in this House shares as a priority concern in terms of the suffering and personal problems with this type of very, very painful disease. My question to the Minister of Health is: given the presentation was a year ago, what action plan did the Minister develop at that point? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): I thank my honourable friend for his interest today in the issue of rheumatology in the Province of Manitoba. *

(1345) Mr. Speaker, there is no question that the Province of Manitoba with the loss over the last two years of half of our rheumatologists is unable to offer what I would consider and what many of the sufferers from arthritis consider to be an adequate level of specialist services in rheumatology. � Mr. Speaker, there are a number of initiatives we have taken with the university and with the various hospitals, primarily I have to say St.

Boniface and Health Sciences Centre, in terms of recruitment of rheumatologists in the short term to provide the clinical time needed to serve patients in Manitoba but indeed with the dual purpose of providing in the longer run an enhancement of the teaching program in Manitoba, so we can graduate from the Faculty of Medicine in Manitoba more specialists trained in rheumatology. Mr. Doer: The Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) leaves on the record an impression that we may have only been interested in this issue today. We wrote the Minister in July of this year.

My further question to the Minister on the same topic, given the fact that it is becoming even more of a crisis in recent times, even nine or 10 months later from the time the Minister met with the group, and it is quoted as saying that the. shortage has now reached crisis proportions-in fact, we have a situation where people are being referred out of the problem to the United States. My question is very specific: two years ago we had six rheumatologists, according to the self-help group; now we are down to three.

What has the Minister done since November of '88 when he met with this group, and the predictions that unfortunately have become truth these days, have taken place? Mr. Orchard: Let me answer the question about the interest I have had in arthritis and rheumatology by putting it into perspective. I met, as Opposition Critic during the election campaign of 1988, with the self help society at their founding meeting when the then Minister of Health refused to attend that meeting-the issue of the three physicians expert in rheumatology that we have lost in Manitoba.

One left two years ago, went back to England for a number of reasons, personal and professional; a second individual has left the province because of a change in personal status and is now practising out of Vancouver; and a third individual unfortunately has simply had to curtail the practice in rheumatology and all medical practice because of personal health problems. We recognized at the onset of this Government that we had a difficulty in delivering continuum of service to those suffering from arthritis. Recruitment efforts have been very pro-active.

In January of next year, 1990, we will have recruited to Manitoba replacement rheumatologists. That will help to fill in some small way the gap of the departure of the previous three over the last two years. We are a long way from achieving the recruitment goals, because rheumatologists are in demand across this country and in North America. Fee Schedules Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): Let the record show that according to the statistics for the American Rheumatism Association there were six rheumatologists in Manitoba in '88, and they are now down to three.

Eight is the desired standard for this province, as I understand it, from the standards across the country and in North America. My question to the Minister is: we wrote him in June or July of this year, the organization met with the Minister in November of last year. Why has the Minister not initiated conversations with the Manitoba Medical Association to look at part of the problem, which is the fee schedule, which I would recognize he inherited, but has been identified as a crisis in November of '88 and something I believe the Minister should have taken action on? Hon.

Donald Orchard (Min is ter of Health): Mr. Speaker, the key word that my honourable friend, the Leader of the New Democratic Party, once Government, has inherited-when I walked into the office as Minister of Health we had five rheumatologists in the Province of Manitoba. That was below the optimum eight all during the entire 15 of 20 years of Government by the previous Party in Government. We are pro-actively recruiting, and we have successfully brought an individual to Manitoba as of January 1, 1990. The fee

schedule differential is very much in discussion between departmental staff and the MMA, in terms of resolving internally with the shoring up fund, the disparity in fee

schedule which has been identified, Mr. Speaker , as one of the detriments to Manitoba recruitment in that our fee

schedule appears to be below a number of other competing jurisdictions in Canada. That is the purpose of the shoring-up fund and has been addressed to a limited degree over the past two years. *

(1350) Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, when the Minister entered in office there were six rheumatologists. They are now down to three. The association met with the Minister in November, and he has not initiated any discussions for 12 months with the Manitoba Medical Association. My question to the Minister is-and I have doubled checked it two weeks ago and again as late as this 1686

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 morning, there have been no initiatives from his department to the MMA to open up the fee

schedule for rheumatologists-why has there not been any leadership by this Minister to deal with part of the problem in terms of people suffering from arthritis in this province? Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I realize my honourable friend wishes to create an issue, and that is his prerogative in this House. The issue of arthritis and rheumatology is very seriously being addressed by this Government with a successful recruitment effort as of January 1, 1990. In the last seven years, there was not one rheumatologist relocated to Manitoba. That is a significant success of this Government in that at St.

Boniface new recruitment has happened. Mr. Speaker, I cannot control the personal career of one of the rheumatologists who left this province or the one who left prior to coming into office, but let me assure my honourable friend and the people of Manitoba suffering from arthritis that we have taken this issue very seriously, and we intend to resolve it like all other inherited problems we got. University of Manitoba Infrastructure Repairs Mrs . Iva Yeo (Sturgeon Creek): Mr. Speaker, the University of Manitoba can be likened to a small city with an infrastructure much of which was built around 1910 to 1915.

Over the past decade, there has been severe underfunding of capital expenses. There is a growing list of deferred maintenance and operational renovation projects with the cost escalating with each deferral. Almost a year ago the Minister of Education (Mr. Derkach) and two of his colleagues toured the problem areas and, to date, there has been no action. Can the Minister tell the House, as a part of alleged good management, what his Government is going to do to prevent the real possibility of a disaster at Manitoba's largest university? Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, I am very happy that the Member for Sturgeon Creek (Mrs. Yeo) has asked this particular question because the situation at the University of Manitoba or the University of Winnipeg or Brandon University did not occur overnight. It is a problem that has been there for a long time. Yes, a year ago I did tour the University of Manitoba to view personally the kinds of problems that they had with capital infrastructure with equipment and so forth. Mr.

Speaker, I can assure the Member for Sturgeon Creek and the Members Opposite that this Government has taken a very active role in ensuring that our capital facilities are brought back to a proper level. We did that with the School of Dentistry and we are going to do that with all other capital facilities. In the capital facilities budget there are significant monies that are going to be allocated to ensure that those problems are looked after and very soon the Member for Sturgeon Creek will know specifically the kinds of dollars that have been allocated to those projects. *

(1355) Steam Tunnel Collapse Mrs . Iva Yeo (Sturgeon Creek): I am not sure that the Minister understood the question, Mr. Speaker. With $200 million set aside for a rainy day, will the Minister immediately .allot funds to assure the university that that rainy day will not occur when a steam tunnel collapses, a real concern with the approach of the winter season. Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, it is strange that I have been in this House now for about a month, and this is probably the second question I have received, and it has taken the Member Opposite this long to arrive at this decision after she read it in the newspaper. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that this Government is addressing the issue, and in the Estimates she will know exactly the amount of money that is going to be allocated to look after the infrastructure and capital facilities at our universities. Mrs . Yeo: I think, if the Minister will look in Hansard of June 26, 1989, he will see I have already spoken about the concerns.

Will the Minister, along with his colleague, the Minister of Workplace Health and Safety (Mrs. Hammond), look through the steam tunnels and look at the asbestos and the concerns of the steam valves that are overoperating to assure that there is no immediate danger to any of the people that are using those tunnels at the universities? Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, the Workplace Health and Safety people have in fact looked at those very areas, and we do have concerns about the steam tunnels at the University of Manitoba. She said she brought it to my attention in June.

I can assure her that we looked at the problem long before June and it was addressed long before then. A problem that had started years ago, she expects a solution to in a month. Very soon she will know exactly the dollars that will be allocated to those kinds of structures to ensure that the safety is maintained and to make sure that capital facilities are brought to standard. Community Investment Fund Legislation Mrs . Gwen Charles (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, in a letter dated September 20, the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation (Mrs.

Mitchelson) stated that the incorporation of the Community Investment Fund, which is to be a voluntary board set up to replace Manitoba Community Services Council, is to be completed by year end. The letter goes on to state that legislation will be required to incorporate this fund. Well, _Mr. Speaker, the date is October 10, and our Order Paper is filled with Bills. Why is this Minister .1687

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 neglecting her responsibility? Where is the Bill, and when will the fund be in place? Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation): Mr. Speaker, I am glad the Member has asked that question, so I will be able to clarify in the House. Yes, the Community Investment Fund will require legislation and that legislation will not be coming forward this Session. The issue that is at hand right now is ensuring the accountability for Lotteries dollars is put in place for next year's Estimate process.

We are in the process of making sure that those Lotteries dollars will be accountable by next year's Estimate process. We are in the process of getting agreements struck among all of the umbrella groups and the special agreement groups so that will be able to happen. Funding Delays Mrs. Gwen Charles (Selkirk): Well, in the same letter � she goes on to state that it will be in place by the year ' end. Why is she going back on her word in the letter to the organizations? Hon.

Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation): I believe in that letter it indicates that we will have agreements in place with the special agreement groups and with the umbrella groups by the end of this year so that they will be able to be accountable within next year's Estimates. That is what we are working towards and that is what will happen. Mr s. Ch arles: Mr. Speak er, why is the Minister , therefore, giving out five-year grants if she is going to do it as in a transitional period? The grants are- being given by her political crony, Bob Swain. What is her process in doing this?

She promises by the year end and does nothing. Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, by year end we will have agreements in place with all of the umbrella groups and all of the special agreement groups so they know that they can do some long-range planning, and they do know that they will have to be accountable through the Estimate process. The Members opposite can ask all the questions they would like to ask, and all the questions they should ask, to hold this Government and this Minister responsible for the allocation of Lotteries dollars. *

(1400) Free Trade Agreement Manufacturing Sector Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): My question is for the Minister of Industry , Trade and Tourism. According to a recent study, the free trade deal has cost 60,000 Canadians their jobs, including 3,000 people in this province. Can the Minister tell us what benefits have Manitobans obtained from the free trade deal in the area of the manufacturing industries? Hon. Jim Ernst (Min ister of Indust ry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, I reject, first of all, the

preamble of the Member for Brandon East, the suggestion that all of the job losses that have happened over the past several months, last year, were brought about by the Free Trade Agreement is wrong, that the Member is wrong, and he can see ghosts all he wishes. The fact of the matter is that free trade has been good for the manufacturers in this province. Just ask Palliser Furniture, for instance, who have added some 300 or 400 new jobs as a result of the Free Trade Agreement. It is the best thing that ever happened to them. Mr.

Leonard Evans: Perhaps the Minister could tell that to the workers at Campbell Soup, Ogilvie and Marr's Leisure Products and at Toro Industries in Steinbach. Tell it to those workers. Mr. Speaker, what specifically is his department doing to help Manitoba manufacturers cope with the free trade deal? Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, again, I reject the comments of the Member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans). He is wrong. We can go through them

chapter and verse if you like, but I do not think it is appropriate in Question Period. We will reserve that for the Estimates process. Mr. Speaker, what are we doing today? We are conducting free trade seminars with our manufacturers in this province. We have enhanced the offshore promotion of our exports. We have several other programs which we can go through again in detail in the Estimates process to show exactly what we are doing to ensure our industry is (

a) competitive and (

b) aggressive in the offshore market. Mr. Leonard Evans: Has the Minister any analysis from his department on specifically what manufacturing industries will expand in Manitoba because of the free trade? According to the last document we had, there were 65,000 jobs in manufacturing in August 1988, and there are 65,000 jobs in manufacturing in August 1989. Where is all the big growth we are talking about? Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, we talked at the beginning of the Session about what has happened in the manufacturing industry.

I do not know what statistics statistics can often be selective, and this should not happen on a regular basis to quote those individual statistics, because it can be turned around. Let me suggest an 8 percent increase in manufacturing in the Province of Manitoba is the second highest in the country; new plant and investment up 578 percent; manufacturing investment up 105 percent. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order. 1688

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 Goods and Services Tax Sales Ta x Credits Mr. Reg Alcock (Osb orne): Mr. Speak er, after complaining about statistics, the Minister uses a great many to support his side of the argument. There is another side to that debate. Mr. Speaker, we finally have a definitive position from the Manitoba Government on the goods and services tax presented by the Minister of Finance. At least we have the Chamber of Commerce's presentation with the Province of Manitoba cover. One of the things that is not included in this, Mr.

Speaker , is any reference to the indexing of credits for low-income Canadians. All of the agencies that provide services to low-income Canadians have expressed concerns about the effect of inflation on these rather minimal credits that are now being presented. The Minister of Finance neglected to address that concern, and I am wondering why. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker , the Member has a copy of the presentation that we have made. We talked about the major flaws that we.see in the GST. They include the visibility. They include the potential impact on the Manitoba economy.

They include certain other matters which we have dialogued over some considerable time. Last Friday morning there was a reference made to certain aspects of sales tax credits and their inflationary aspects. Mr. Alcock: Not quite, Mr. Speaker. There was a reference made to sales tax credits. However, the concern is that they are not going to be indexed. Does this Government support full indexing of the sales tax credits? Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker , I have no problem answering that question.

As Governments in the past from time to time have inflated our own cost-of-living tax credit directly taking into account inflationary elements in the economy, I would expect and would support any call that would cause the federal Government from time to time or by way of some formula to see indexing be part of the GST. Mr. Alcock: Well, Mr. Speaker, perhaps if the Minister believes that, he can put it in writing and send it to the Blenkarn Committee. He neglected to do so on this document. Goods and Services Tax Income Security Programs Mr.

Reg Alcock (Osborne): I do have a question for the Minister of Community Services. Coopers and Lybrand, in their report on the impact of the GST on Income Security Programs, mentions the increasing practice of recovering income from members of the community on income security. Will the Minister assure us that practice will not exist in Manitoba? Hon. Charlotte Oleson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I assume that the Member is meaning getting back monies that have been paid, overpayments, paid in error? Mr. Alcock: Sales tax credits. Mrs. Oleson: Sales tax credits. I will have to have a look at that.

The department is at this moment studying the effect of the GST with social services in Manitoba in conjunction with the Department of Finance, and there will be answers forthcoming to those questions. Free Trade Agreement Motor Vehicle Regulations Mr. Jim Maloway (El mwo od): Mr. Speak er , my question is to the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Albert Driedger) and follows up on a question asked earlier by the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs). The federal Cabinet has waived Canadian Safety Standards for used cars from the United States to help implement the Free Trade Agreement.

The new rules also lack a system whereby Canadian owners would be informed of defects and subsequent recalls. Canada has tougher seat belt, higher bumper standards and daytime running light standards in cars. Consumers will lose unless Canada and the United States develop a system to attract recalls, liens, and fraud across the border. My question to the Minister is: what system does the Minister have to track recalls, liens, and frauds across the border? Hon. Albert Driedger (Minis ter of Hig hways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice. Mr. Maloway: Mr.

Speaker, I have a supplementary to the same Minister. Criminals might also take advantage of the lack of a common car registry between the two countries to sell stolen cars, cars with liens against them and rebuilt cars passed off as originals. Manitoba only requires that cars be in safe mechanical order and does not really check for the stolen cars and cars without liens. How does the Minister plan to deal with this potentially serious problem? * (14 10) Mr.

Albert Driedger: I will take that question as notice as well, but I can indicate that whatever it takes in ter ms of bringing our standards up to whatever requirement we think is the right standard that we should have, we will do that, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, I have a final supplementary to the same Minister. Now that the Minister recognizes this initiative was taken on the part of the federal Government to pacify the U.S. in terms of implementing the Free Trade Agreement, what steps are he and the First Minister (Mr.

Filmon) taking to make representation to the federal Government to tighten standards? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Speaker, first of all, we will review what our standards are and what our jurisdiction 1689

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 is. In conjunction with that, we will take whatever steps we have to do with our counterparts federally to discuss with them to see what jurisdiction they have in terms of the safety standards and what standards we have in the province. It was my understanding that we have our own standards. I will gather all the information and I will report back to the Member. GATT Decision Canadian Dairy Products Mr. Laurie Evans (Fort Garry): Mr.

Speaker, tomorrow the General Council of GATT is expected to. endorse a prior panel recommendation that Canada not be permitted to include processed dairy products on its import control list, specifically ice cream and yogurt. This will mean that there will be, essentially, free flow of these products into Canada from the United States subject only to the existing tariffs. My question is to the Minister of Agriculture. What impact does he see this having on the Canadian and Manitoba dairy industry? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): There is a bit of a presumption there that it will be accepted by GATI.

It is only a recommendation that GATT can make to a country like Canada, and we can choose or not choose to abide by the regulation. Mr. Laurie Evans: The Minister well knows that Canada has not gone against a GATI decision to date. My supplementary question to the same Minister is: can the Minister indicate what impact the further reduction of the tariff on American products coming into Canada will be? Prior to the Free Trade Agreement there was a 17.5 percent tariff on the entry of dairy products. It has now dropped, as of the 1st of January, 1990, to 14 percent, and it will disappear entirely by 1998.

Can the Minister indicate what impact that will have on this supply managed industry? Mr. Findlay: We have had considerable discussion with the Milk Producers Marketing Board as recently as last Friday. They were in, we talked about this, and nobody really knows the true impact that this will have because there is going to be a little more competition, and whether our industries here can handle that competition, time will tell. We are in consultation continuously.

The dairy industry realizes that they must, in the eyes of the consumer, be seen to be competitive and offering the lowest cost product on the market at the highest possible quality. They know they have that mission in front of them and we are still looking at the question as to how we can react as a province and as a country, as things unfold in the coming months. Free Trade Agreement Canadian Dairy Products Mr. Laurie Evans (Fort Garry): Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister confirm that Canadian dairy products cannot move into the United States because those dairy products are on the import control list of the Americans, and does this, in his opinion, adhere to the intent of the Free Trade Agreement? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): I will go back to the first answer I gave, Mr. Speaker, which said that we can choose not to abide by the GATT ruling, the GATT decision, and what he has just put on the record is a good indication as to why we would choose not ·to. Federal Drought Program Ag Rep Assist ance Mr. Bill Uruski (I nterlake): Mr.

Speaker, over the last number of months the Minister of Agriculture has indicated that the participation in the federal drought program would not be undertaken by the province because it was a solely announced federal program, and that there would be no participation of the Government of Manitoba. The program has so many flaws, and so much confusion is out there with appeals and with farmers trying to find out what the calculations are. His staff are not participating in assisting the farm community because of his earlier refusal.

Now that Manitoba is contributing financially to the federal program, can the Minister assure this House, and the farmers of Manitoba, that his staff out in the field will in fact assist the farming community in trying to get the necessary information to process their appeals against the federal rulings? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I can assure the Member that my department staff are assisting producers in this issue, as they have in every other issue, to the best of their ability.

Through the ag rep offices we are prepared to supply the information that has been developed by crop insurance on a risk area basis, for farmers to know what the kind of yields are on a long-term basis. Mr. Uruski: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Minister should check with his extension staff. Crop insurance information is one thing, but ag reps assisting farmers is another and that is not happening. Mr. Findlay: I hate to hear a distinguished Member put untruthful information on the record. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. The Honourable Member does not have a point of order. The Honourable Member for the Interlake.

Mr. Uruski: Mr. Speaker, the Minister should know that even secretary-treasurers in rural municipalities are complaining that they really cannot get the information on this whole area, and his staff are not assisting the farmers because they do not want to get involved. It is so screwed up, that program, and I do not blame them. I, quite frankly, do not blame them. 1690

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 Goods and Services Tax Farming Impact Mr. Bill Uruski (Interlake): Mr. Speaker , I ask the Minister of Agriculture, on another matter: can he indicate whether his department has done an analysis on the impact of the goods and services tax on the farm community and, if they have not, why have they not, because their brief to the federal Government, as of October '89 gives ·no indication of the impact on the farm community? Hon. Glen Findlay (Minis ter of Agriculture): Mr. Spea ker, the Member started that question by a deliberation of accusing my staff of not helping the farm community.

I categorically reject any Member who was a former Minister of Agriculture standing up in this House and maligning the staff of the Department of Agriculture. They have assisted farmers on a continuous basis. A letter from the Deputy Minister a week ago gave them clear authorization to discuss with farmers any problems they had with making appeals to the federal Drought Assistance Program. Yes, there are problems with that program and the way it is administered, and my staff are doing everything possible to help farmers deal with the issues that they have in front of them. Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Member for the Interlake, with his final supplementary question. Mr. Uruski: Mr. Speaker, I do not blame the staff. I blame the Minister because he gave the direction. He gave the direction that he would not be involved in the program and I did not blame him for that. Now that he is financially involved, let us get on with the job. Wh at about the answer to the question about the farm community and the impact on them from the goods and services tax? Mr.

Findlay: If the Member would have listened to the answer to the last question, he would have heard very clearly that the department staff has had a meeting, the ag reps have been talked to by the Deputy Minister, and a letter has gone from the Deputy Minister authorizing staff to give all the information that they can to help the farmers deal with the problems that they have in making their appeals on that particular program. Highway Traffic Act Justice Minister's Comments Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for St. James has time for one very short question. Mr. Paul ·Edwards (St. James): Mr.

Speaker, my question is for the Premier (Mr. Filmon). This morning the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mccrae) indicated at the committee hearings looking into further amendments to the drunk driving legislation that the reason the-drunk driving legislation was so poorly drafted in the first place was because he did not want to cause himself and his staff the effort to get it right until he had tested 1691 the waters in this Legislature .. This is indeed bizarre logic.

My question is: will the Premier please respond to his Minister's statements which constitute, in my opinion, a recommendation of an abuse of the legislative process? * ( 1420) Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I am satisfied, Mr. Speaker, that the Honourable Member did not get on his caucus list today for questions and decided to pop in regardless. He gives us a very careless and disjointed rendering of what went on in the committee this morning. I am sure a rereading of the Hansard for this morning will clear that up for him.

The Honourable Member would suggest that Governments go ah ead and enter upon leng thy processes of imple'mentation prior to having legislative approval. This Government does not operate, Mr. Speaker , on issues as important as this without legislative approval, and the Honourable Member , he makes clear the approach that he would use if he were given the opportunity, which is a fat chance, I suggest. Mr. Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. James Mccrae (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, should it be the will of the House to complete the Estimate process for the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Highways, the Agriculture Department would be followed by the Rural Development Department, and Highways Department would be followed by the Health Department. I move that the Speaker now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Mr. Speaker: I would like tc> thank the Honourable Government House Leader for that clarification. It has been moved by the Honourable Government House Leader that Mr.

Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House-the Honourable Member for Ellice. NON -POLITICA L STATEME NTS Ms. Avis Gray (Ellice): Mr. Speaker, would it be possible to have leave to revert back to non-political statements? Mr. Speaker: Is there leave to revert back to non political statements? (Agreed) Ms. Gray: Today we had the opportuni ty, some Members of the Government and Members of the Opposition, to be part of a reception honouring foster parents this afternoon.

I would like to make special note of one particular foster parent, Susan Torrie, from Richer, Manitoba, who was honoured as foster parent of the year. I think, Mr. Speaker, all Honourable Members would join this afternoon in congratulating Susan Torrie.

Tuesda� October 10, 1989 Susan represents a foster parent. She has fostered in eastern Manitoba for Child and Family Services. She has also fostered for the South Child and Fam ily Services, and what she does is oftenti mes takes special needs children. I think the love, the dedica tion and the unending comm itment of indi viduals such as Susan Torrie should cer tainly be recogn ized by all Mem bers of this Legisla ture. We do join in saying congra tulations to Susan, and thank you very much to all foster parents in Man itoba. Mr. Speaker: Does the Honou rable Min ister of Family Servi ces (Mr s.

Oleson) have leave to make a non political statement? (Agreed) The Honour able Min ister of Family Services. Hon. Charlotte Oleson (Minister of Family Services): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to Mem bers of the Ho use for that privilege. Yes, I would like to associate myself also with the • Mem ber for Ell ice (Ms. Gr ay) with her remarks on foster ' parents, and most particula rly of cou rse with the award gi ven to Susan Torrie at lunch time to recog nize her work and her dedica tion to the foster childr en in her care.

Of course, also she is representative of the foster parents of Manitoba and I kno w realizes she was really acc epting that award on behave of all the foster parents. Foster parenting is a very im portant and vital part of the services provided by my department, so it was a pleasure for me at lunch time to attend the rec eption and to take greetings on behalf of the people of Man itoba to the foster parents and person ally thank them for all their work and dedica tion. Without them we would be in a very di fficult position. As I say, I associate myself with the words of the Mem ber for Ell ice (Ms.

Gray) and cong ratula te and thank all foster parents in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: Does the Honour able Mem ber for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia-Leis) have leave to make a non polit ical statement? (Agreed) The Honour able Mem ber for St. Johns. Ma. Judy Waaylycia-Leia (St. Johna): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to briefly add for the record the suppor t of Mem bers of our caucus in rec ognition of foster parents in Man itoba, to associ ate myself and the feelings of my caucus with the sentiments of the Mem ber for Ell ice (Ms. Gray) and the Minis ter of Family of Services (Mr s. Oleson).

We too would lik e to pay tri bute to all foster parents for their incred ible contribution to qual ity of li fe in Mani toba, and in particular to the award received today by Susan Torrie. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the Honour able Go vernment Ho use Leader (Mr. Mccr ae), seco nded by the Honour able Min ister of Fin ance (Mr. Man ness), that Mr.

Speaker do now leave the Chair and the Ho use resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supp ly to be granted to Her Majesty. ***** The Ho use resolved itself into a Comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Hon ourable Mem ber for Mi nn edosa (Mr . Gil leshamm er) in the Chair for the Department of Hig hways and Transportation; and the Honour able Memb er for Lac du Bon net (Mr . Praznik) in the Chair for the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Rural Development.) CONC URRENT COMM IT TEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY-HIGHW AYS AND TRANSPORT AT ION * (1 430) Mr.

Chairman (Harold Gilleshammer): I call this meeting to order to dis cus s the Estima tes of the Hig hways and Transpor tation Depart ment. Item 8. Expendi tures Related to Capital , (

b) Aid to Citi es, Towns and Villages $1, 500,000-the Mem ber for Assini boia. Mr. Ed Mandrake (Assiniboia): Could the Min ister pl ease provide the two critics of the work that he has now undertaken under this sect ion for Aid to Cities, Towns and Villages, please? Hon. Albert Drie dger (Minis ter of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Chairman , I am not sure whether I did table that in the Hous e. If I have not, I cer tainly am prepar ed to forward that information to the crit ics on both sides. I was under the impr ession that I had done that. If I have not done that, I will bring that in formation forward. Mr.

Mandrake: If my memor y serves me right, Mr. Chairman, we arrived at this subsect ion just prior to recess last Thursday and I brought up an issue and that was in the The Pas area. We had not dis cussed tabling of the other reports or the aid that he had provided to these various towns and vil lages. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I will make a lis t available to Mem bers of the comm ittee of the whole Gr ant-I n-Aid program to towns and villa ges. Mr. Chairman: Item 8.(b)- pass. 8.(

c) Work in Local Go vernment Distr icts and Un organ ized Territor y, $4,6 00,000 -the Member for Assini boia. Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chairman, again, in stead of going through a long di ssertation on this, could the Minis ter please table all of the work that has taken place to the tune of $4,6 00,000 in the local gover nment dis tric ts and unor gan ized territor y? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I cannot do that for the simple reason that the local government districts have their projects which basically they identif y. We are in volved in the capital funding. We allo w so much. In 1692

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 fact , I might ind icate that we in creased the funding to local government di stricts in the last budget to the point where I think it ini tially was at one time. There was a cutback and we have restored that funding and they basicall y have their road prog ram und er which they operate. If the Mem ber is aware, cer tain projects are 50-50 and cer tain projects we do work in the local government di stric ts to the tune of 10 0 percent, on market roads. They have cer tain responsibi lit ies in terms of snowplo wing, maintenance, et cetera, on cer tain roads.

I can gi ve the Mem ber the mon ies that have been forwarded to each local governm ent di strict . Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chairm an, tha t would be very suffi cient. Mr. Chairman: Item 8. (c)- pass. 8.(

d) Rural Muni cipal Bridge Assistance Program , $500,0 00 -the Member for Assi ni boia. Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chair man, I notic ed last year ther e were no mon ies for this type of a program. All of a sudden, this year we have $500,00 0.00. Could the Min ister please explain how is it that last year there was no assistance program for this type of ende avour, yet this year we have $500,000 in it? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, with great pleasure can I explain why there was no mone y the re last year. This is a new program we have just in itiated this year.

Maybe I should take some tim e to clar ify exact ly what this program cons ists of. As the Mem ber is aware, and as comm ittee Mem bers are aware, we have the Grant in-Aid to Cities, Towns and Vil lages which add resses basically co mmunit ies. However, there was no provisi on for any funding for capital prog rams in municip alities, specifically brid ges, so we have developed what we call the Ru ral Muni cipal Bridge Assistanc e Program , which is basically going to be shar ed 50-50. We will cost share 50 percent of the consulting engi neer.

One of the requir ements is that if a mun icipal ity has a bridge, in many cases -fi rst of all let me back up a step because I am confusing the issue. We have had many req uests through my depar tment and other departments, Muni cipal Affairs, Water Resources, for funding for bridge s which basically do not come under Government jurisdic tion. It was felt that it was necessary to maybe add ress that. What we have done is we have develo ped a prog ram. Part of the program is that they requir e a professional consultant or engi neer to do the design aspect of it. We pay 50 percent of that.

The engi neer will then come forward with his reco mm endation. He will also be supervi sing the job, whether it is cu lverts, a bridge, whatever kind of cros sing that is acc eptable; however, we mai n.tain that ther e have to be cer tain standards in terms of weight and width becaus e we are cost shari ng as Government. We want a good program, and we do not want the mun icipalit ies to build brid ges that would not adequately take weight because we would be partly liable in a case like that.

That is why we are asking for qual ified engi neers to do the survey design and the supervi sion of it to make sure that the job is done right. On the bridge itself, we will be cost shari ng 50-50; however, we will not be cost shari ng the approach with the dir t that is involv ed, because it was our feeling that most muni ci paliti es have this kind of equi pment available, and could probably unde rtake that work cheaper than any other way. So that is the reason why we had ac tually hoped to have $1 ,000,0 00 in the program .

However, we realiz ed at the time when we made the annou ncement that possi bly until We initia ted it and got it going with engi neers who actually do the survey desi gn that we might not be able to flow that much money this year. I have to ind ica te, however, that I am very pleased with the appl ica tions that we have receiv ed. To date we have approved one bridge in the R. M. of Spring field, I believe, and we have also gi ven approval for the engi neering to proceed in six other munici palitie s where they· have made appli ca tion. We have looked at the applic ations.

We feel that it is justified, and I have giv en appro val up to $1 0,000 in each of those six for the in itial engi neering. Once the engi neering process is comple ted then they come back and get final app roval for the construc tion end of it. Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chairman, I can apprecia te what the Min ister is doing, and I compli ment him upon this new initia tive that he has undertak en. Could he provide the critics with the areas in which this assistance program is being offered to?

You just mentioned R.M. of Springfield, are there any other ones that you have docum ented and you can probably provide this comm ittee with a li st? Mr. Albert Dr iedger: Yes, Mr . Chairman, all munic ipalitie s have been written. When we came forward with the program and proceeded with it, we wrote all muni ci palit ies tel ling them what the program was about. Subsequent to that we then sent out appl ica tion forms to each of the municip alit ies. We have put in a dead line on it because there has to be, somewhere alo ng the line, a deadline in terms of the applic ations.

The deadlin e I believe was in September sometime and we have to date a total of 18 appl ica tions, some that we have given the tentativ e approval on, others we are still waiting for the final decision in terms of whether they can qualify or not . I can give the Member the partial list. I have it here for myself. I can make copie s of the li st for the Mem ber and forward it to him, or if he can wait until we have dealt with the balanc e of the requests and then gi ve him the fi n al ized in forma tion at that ti me. * (14 40) Mr. Mandrake: That is quite all right, Mr.

Chairman , to the Mi nis ter, but ther e is no necessity in having a partial li st. Onc e it has been comp leted , if he could provide both critic s with the copy, I think we would be very, very appr ecia tive. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman , once we have the lis t comple ted, I will make sure that the copies of the li st get to the crit ics. 1693

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass- pass. (

e) Acq uisition/ Construc tion of Physical Assets:

(1) Other Pr ojects, $4,326, 200 -t he Me m ber for Assinib oia. Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chairman, could the Min ister please explain, under Other Projects, where it is to a tune of $4 ,326,200, what does that real ly entai l? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman , I will ind icate what is invol ved und er Ac quisition /Construction of Physical Assets. One is airpor t upgra ding, where we had a request for $379,500.00. We appropria ted $76,000 for that. Mr. Chairman, let me make a correc tion here. Under airpor t upgrading we have $379,500 for this year.

For gr avel pit restoration, which I made reference to earlier on, we have $48,000 put in here. In that, basically what we do, we go around and try and get the gr avel pits in the safe con dition - the sloping. We had some di scussion on that. High ways equipm ent and tools ac counts for $3,083, 700.00. Crushed gravel purchases, where we buy crushed gr avel, $2.9 million. Crushed gr avel issue s-th at $3,25 0, 000 is a revolving fund where we put crushed gr avel, where we do this during the cou rse of the winter . We put it out early and then we charge it back to the various jobs.

Bridge material purcha ses are half a million doll ars, and here the same thing again. We buy a cer tain amount of, let us say, cu lverts, et cete ra, and then we ch arge it to the job so it comes back as a cred it. Hig hways, buildings and storage yards is $712,8 00.00. Im provements to weigh scales is a stand ard thing of about $75,000.00. Ferry landing impr ovements is $45,000 .00. The ferries thems elves, we have $1 35,000 appropria ted for that. Capital gr ants for transporta tion for the mobil ity di sadvantaged in rural Manitoba-w e have gone into that program to some degree. We have $50,0 00 in there.

Then unde r the water bom ber cont ract we have $1 47,200, making up a total of $4,326,200.00. Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass-the Mem ber for Assini boia. Mr. Mandrake: Unde r (e)(2), ple ase, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman: On (e)( 1) , are we fin ished with that pass. (e)

(2) Northern Development Agreement - Canada Ma nitoba $258,0 00-t he Mem ber for Assini boia. Mr. Mandrake: I notic ed that there you have $258,000, and under (3) is exactly the same Recov erable from Nor thern Affairs to a tune of $258,000.00. Is this a coi ncide nce or do these two items run hand in hand? If so, I would lik e an explanation on that. Mr. Albert Driedger: I will try and explain it here.

Under this funding here, this is part of the Nor thern Dev elopment Ag reem ent, the Canada -Ma nitoba Nor thern Ai rport Development Program, and the follo wing pr ojects are funded by the No rthern Developme nt Agreement in 19 89-90. They set the prio rities in terms of where we spend the funding.

For example, gravel for Pukatawagan is $200,000; for Shama ttawa it was $300 ,000; fencing at Berens River was $35,000; at Gods Lake Narrows it was $15, 000; the shop floor at Red Sucker Lake was $5,000; the runway lights at Red Suc ker Lake was $40,000; and South Ind ian Lake was $50,000, for a total of $645,000 which basically is recovered through the Department of No rthern Affairs und er the agreement. Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass-the Mem ber for Chur chill. Mr.

Jay Cowan (Churchill): Perhaps the Min ister can ind icate what is the projected status for the con tinuation of projects that have been funded in the past under the Nor thern Development Agreement with respect to negotiations that are now ongoing? Mr. Albert Driedger: I wonder if the Mem ber could cla rify, so I get the question right. Mr. Cowan: We have had a Nor thern Develop ment Agreement in place now sinc e the mid-7 0s really for the- Mr. Albert Drie dger: Together with the federal Government? Mr.

Cowan: Yes, with the federal Government under different names, Northern Development Agreement, the Northlands Agreement. It appears as if that agreement now will not be renegotiated . There were a large num ber of projects which were funde d und er the Nor thern Developme nt Agreement as part of its ongoing activities. I am asking the Minis ter if he has any information as to the stat us of the negot iations, or la ck of negotia tions involving the Northern Development Agreement, and if it is not to be reneg otiated , what will happen to the projects?

How will they, that are cu rrently funded under that prog ram , be funded? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr . Chairman, it is my und erstanding, and my people work relatively cl osely with the Department of Nor thern Affairs, that they are in the process of negotiating right now. We antici pate that there will be some agreements reached with the federal Government. Once that has happened, then we come into pl ay.

It is the Department of Nor thern Affairs that does the negotia ting and that involves-l ike the requests we have from the various commun ities for airpor t upgrading, for new airpor ts, and these are the kinds of things that Nor thern Affairs is working on right now. Onc e they reach an agreem ent, then we have our role to pla y in terms of responsi bil ity, as the Member well kno ws, in terms of doing the ac tual construc tion if there is an agreement, mai ntenance, et cetera. Mr. Cowan: Certainly the Department of Nor thern Affai rs keeps the Depart ment of Hi g hways and 1694

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 Transporta tion upda ted on the sta tus of the negotia tions. Can the Min ister indic ate what negot iations are taking place? He says that they are negot iating right now for some new agreements. Will th ey be agreements based on the Northern Development Agreement or the Nor thlands Agreement model? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, we do not have the details exact ly of what the y are work ing on. They have various projects they are tryi ng to work on based on the requests that we have-t hat Govern ment has received for, let us say, airpor t construc tion.

I do not have an update at the present time in terms of exactly where they are at. I can try and get that informa tion, but the latest co nversa tion that we had with the department was that it is still being negotia ted and I have nothing mo re definitive. Mr. Cowan: Yes, two specific qu estions, and the Min ister says it is being negotia ted . Can he indic ate when it is anticipa ted that tho se negotia tions will be comple te? The second question is based on his word ing. He says that various projects are being worked on at the present time.

Does that mean tha t the nego tiations are not going to fall into the model where you have an umbrella agreement from which di fferent projects are pursued but rather will be developed around specific projects and separate agreements? * (1 450) Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I want to indic ate that there was some hope that agreements would be comple ted by the end of this month but we do not have that assurance. I think that the target date was the end of this month. The Mem ber is aware that airports are not the only aspect of it that is involv ed.

There are many other aspects, including roads and other services. I do not have a li st specifically of the ones that the Mini ster of No rthern Affairs (Mr . Downey) has on his plate before the federal Govern ment. It would be most appropr iate maybe to ask him. Mr. Cowan: The second part of the question was not answered , Mr. Chai rperson. Are we to anticipa te from what the Min ister said that there will be various separate agreements based around separate projects, or will they be an umbr ella agreement from which di fferent projects will be fin anced and pursued ? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr.

Chairman, the Department of No rthern Affa ir s is basically the whole of the negotia tions. I can not ind icate whether it is on a package deal or on a project-by-project basis. I wish I would because it would gi ve me some comfort in terms of doing the planning within our department as well, but we do not have that informa tion. Mr. Cowan: The Min ister has made my point, inadvertently I believe, but it is a valid point nonetheless.

If they do not kno w how that agreement is going to be structured, they do not have a comfort level which enables them to plan effect ively over the cou rse of the next one to five years, five years being the common term of the agreement. If the Government is going to negotia te piecemeal agreements, their job is going to be much mor e difficult as a Government and as a depar tment, as all departments will suffer that same consequence of a piecemeal approach. They will not be able to plan effectively .

The commun ities will not kno w effect ively what they have in store for them, how they should access programs over a period of time, and it will be a very di srupt ive process. I would hope that the Government would operate as an entity and that there would be consultations between the di fferent departments with respect to negotia tions. I can tell the Mini ster that when we were negotia ting the new Northern Development Agreement back in'8 1, the re was extens ive consu ltation with the departments to determine how they would like to see that agreement struc tured.

Is he telling me that process, that in ternal process, has broken down to where an agreement is antic ipated to be struck by the end of this month, or was antici pated to be struck by the end of this month, and he does not even know what format that agreement mi ght take? Is that what he is tryi ng to tell us? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, let the Mem ber not try and twist this thing around to where it is a big issue. The pr ocess is very cmuch the . same. The Department of Nor thern Affairs fully kno ws what our needs and concerns are in terms of the various projects that they have on the table.

When they have comple ted their agreements with the federal Government, they will have addressed those and will let us know exactly where we stand with that. They are the ones that are doing the negotia ting, and if the y come up with a package deal our concerns will be add ressing that and we can take it from there. If they come on a project-by-pro ject basis they are also aware of our needs in terms of tim e requir ements, suppl ies, et cetera. It is not as if we are operating ind ependently of each other, but they are doing the negotia ting and I am not involved in that at this stage of the game. Mr.

Cowan: Which approach would the Min ister prefer? Mr. Albert Driedger: Well, Mr. Chairman, if I had my druthers I think we would want a package deal, a long term package deal, so that our planning would be a little bit more suitable. Certai nly that is a gi ven. Rather than do it on a project-by-p roject basis, I would lik e to have an agreement that would be five or ten years from my depa rtment 's point of view so that we could say this is when we want to und ertake cer tain works.

The Mem ber was well aware, when we talk of doing upgradings with northern airpor ts, you just do not move equipm ent into some of these pl aces overnight, you have to wait until the season allo ws it to happen so that you can do your crush ing, et cetera. There is a lot involved, thou gh. Staff know what they are up against and so does the Department of Nor thern Affairs . In that respect we work very clos ely, just like we did with Nor way Hous e when we tal ked about dividing the responsi bili ty of roads in the system.

We accepted a cer tain por tion of it, including the bridge, and the Department of Nor thern Affairs was taking over the balanc e of the roads in the commu nity. I mean , we work 1695

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 on many projects together . The same thing with the winter roads, some of the funding basically has been coming out of the Department of Nor thern Affairs, I believe. They have done some. I am not tryi ng to be evasive about anything, I am just tryi ng to explain to the Mem ber basically that the system is still operating the way it used to operate and ther e is good co op eration. I am cer tainly not upset with my colleague, Mr. Down ey, who is the Minis ter responsible for that.

I conv erse with him and staff converses with staff, but at the present time I do not kno w exactly where they are at with their negotia tions. Mr. Cowan: Just to check my own understanding of the situation, the Min ister ind icated that Northern Affairs do es a portion of the winter roads and then Hig hways and Transporta tion. My unde rstanding is that the only No rthern Affairs projects for wint er roads would be Pik witonei and Thicke t Portage which are small winter roads but very im portant to th ose com mun itie s none theless.

The rest come out of Hig hways and Transporta tion, so it is qui te an insign ificant amount by compariso n, although it is of some great sign ificance to the co mmuni ties that they receive those winter roads. Is that co rrect? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman , that is corr ect . I just used that in reference to some of the things that were being done joint ly. It is not a major con dition. Mr. Cowan: Speaking of airpor ts then , in the Nor thern Development Agreement projects. Granville Lake has been asking for an airpor t for quite some tim e.

It was on a long er li st of airpor ts that needed to be develop ed over a period of time. The last new airport of cou rse in the No rth is the Tadoule Lake airport, which has served that commun ity very well and I think added to the quality of li fe of that communi ty as well as helped to make it a safer and healt hier place to li ve and to work for residents there. However, there is to my kn owledge in my area one area that still requir es an airstrip that does not have one, and that is Granville Lake.

They are isol ated during the freeze-up and the break-up period of the year which can be qui te lengthy in that part of the province. There was a fatality a couple of years ago with someone going through the ice, travelling from Gr anville Lake to Leaf Rapids during either the freeze-up or break-up period . They felt that that may have been avoided had there been airstrip capa city in the commun ity.

I do not kno w if that was the case or not, but I think a strong argument can be made, not onl y based on that incident, but based on many other problems that the commun ity experiences, for at least a small but workable airstrip for that com muni ty so that they can have some greater access than they now have. Would that be one of the projects which the department has put forward as a recom mendation for any new agreement? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I might ind icate tha t the Granvi lle Lake airpor t is on the long- term lis t as part of the ongoing negotiations with the federal Go vernment. Mr.

Cowan: Can the Mini ster ind icate what other air ports are on that long- term list? 1696 Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, Wasagamack is another one that we think is a prior ity, and Poplar River is a new one. They have a strip there right now, but I do not think it is adequate. We are looking at putting that forward as another strip that should be on the list. * (1 500) Mr. Cowan: I am some what fam ilia r with the Wasagamack strip from a number of years ago, but I do not have any recent experienc es with it. At one tim e, th ere was an emergenc y strip in Wasagamack.

The residents like to refer to it as an emergenc y strip because the y said if one were to attempt to land on it, it would in deed be an emergenc y. At least ther e was a cleared area ther e that was not suitable as an airstrip on an ongoing basis, but was possible to be util ized from time to time. I would ask the Min ister if that airstrip is still functional at all, even to the very limi ted extent that it was in the past? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I would have to ind ica te that the airpor t that the Mem ber is referring to is not usable, with that kind of a buildup around the area.

There is a tempo rary, provisional site that has been ident ified outside the reserve, a couple of mi les away. We have met with the people from the com muni ty on a few occa sions talking about it. If the agreements are fruitful with the federal Government, then naturally that is the one that we would be looking at in terms of providing that kind of service. Mr. Cowan: I would just like to make a special plea for the Granville Lake airstrip. I kno w the di fficultie s in tryi ng to build airstrips and the cost of buildin g airstrips in the Nor th, but they are very im portant to com muni ties.

Granville Lake is a co mmuni ty that is relatively isol ated in a lot of ways and the com mun ity has been lobbying for a number of years, including the previous Govern ment, quite string ently for an airstrip. I am ple ased to see tha t it is still on the list. I hope that the negotia tions will be successful that will allo w for the cont in uation of an airpor t construction project under whatever new federal/pr ovincial agreement is forthc oming.

I am somewhat worried because the last time the Northlands Agreement ran out when a Conservative Government was in power, I will be quite frank, it was not success fully renegotia ted. It was put on hold for a period of time, and it was not until a New Democratic Party gai ned Government that we were able to negotiate a new agreement . I do not want to see that same situa tion happen again. I am conc erned abou t the lack of prog ress in negotiations since the new Government has taken office.

So I will encou rage the Min ister to put whatever pressure he can on his colle ague, the Min ister of Northern Affairs (Mr . Downey), to ensur e tha t a com prehensiv e agreement is negotia ted and one that will be able to include the construc tion of new airstrips, such as the Granvi lle Lake, the Wasaykamak and the Poplar River airstrips, which are all very needed ai rstrips at this time. The last Nor thern Development Agreement did not allo w for the use of mon ies under it for airstrips in co mmuni ties such as Leaf Rapids.

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 The Leaf Rapids airstrip is one that, for quite some tim e, has requir ed some upgr ading and impr ovements. Ther e is an airstrip there that is usable, but at certain tim es of the year it is less usable than others. There are cer tain ti mes when even the medi- vac cannot land in the co mmun ity. That creates some concerns and anxie ties. That is particularly the case where you have an ind ustrial commun ity with a mine site and mill being the main emplo yer in the area.

Both mine sites and mills do, from time to time, experience very serious accidents which require immedia te attention. The residents of that com muni ty would feel much mo re comfor table if the airstrip was imp roved to the point where it could acco mmoda te the cita tion; the medi -vac plane, the li fe flight at any gi ven time. They require not substantial impr ovements but impr ovements that would cost more than the com muni ty itself can afford to pay on its own. I would ask the Min ister if he is prepared to encou rage his col league, the Min ister of Nor thern Affairs (Mr .

Downey) to do some thing the previous adminis tration was not able to do, and that was im prove provi sions for construc tion, mai ntenance and impr ovements to airstrips, such as the Leaf Rapids airstrip, in any new agreement. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to ind icate to the Member that his requests are noted in terms of the various aspects that he dealt with to some deg ree. He expresses some conc ern about the record of his Go ve rnment in terms of the agreements that they made.

I just want to ind ic ate to him that I am very pleased with the performance within my department in terms of the mon ies that we have expended on hig hway construc tion and our concerns that are ongoing in transp ortation. I want to assure the Mem ber that our pri oritie s are in the right place, and we will con tinue to work extensiv ely to try and impr ove the airports in the Nor th. Dealing specifical ly with Leaf Rapids, as the Mem ber is aware, Leaf Rapids is not in cluded under our remote program. However, we have joint arrangements tha t are ongoing with them.

I can indic ate to the Mem ber that I landed there this summer and met with the commun ity, and they expressed their concern about the runway at that time. Certain ly, as we can bring forward funding and work out arrangements, we would like to have all our airpor ts in good condition up north. There are ongoing requests from even the people who are suppl ying the service, that are flying the planes in there, ind ica ting they would like to have upgr ading of airpor ts in terms of paved runways with the proper lighting, et cetera. We certai nly will continue to see whether we can do that.

Any one of us that fly up nor th from time to time and land on th ese have thoughts about this and conc erns about it. I can ind ica te to the Mem ber that we will cer tainly not have the airpor ts in northern Ma nitoba play any lesser role than they have in the past, ho pefully a more prog ressive role that we can do in terms of upgrading them. Mr. Cowan: The Min ister ind icated , when he met with Leaf Rapids · reside nts, that they expressed concerns to them and gave an overview in a very gen eral statement that tho se concerns would be dealt with by hi mself and his Government.

Can he ind icate what specific act ion he has taken si nce that meeting to deal with the specific concerns that were add ressed to him at that ti me? Mr. Albert Driedger: Is the Mem ber asking about Leaf Rapids, per se? Mr. Chairman, to date we have not done anythin g specific with the Leaf Rapids one. I am not sure, and I have not checked whether the Department of Northern Affairs has anything on their books for that. Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass? Item (eX3) Less: Recov erable From No rthern Affairs, $258,0 00- pass. (

f) Canada -M anitoba Chur chi ll Agre ement, no expenditur e. The Mem ber for Assini boia. Mr. Mandrake: Mr. Chairman, -we finally came to this one. Has the Min ister had any conversa tion with the federal Min ister in renegot ia ting this Churchill Agreement for the fort hcom ing year, or is this a dead issue now? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, this whole issue of the Canada -M anitoba Churchill Agreement, as the Member is aware, the agreement, the ERDA agreement, has term inated. The province pretty well met their obl igations in terms of Churc hill.

However, the federal Government has not neces sarily comp leted their part of it. Un fortunately, in the co nversations that I have had with the federal Min ister, raising it with him, he has gi ven the indic ation that the portion of the federal respo nsibili ty that has not been met to date, that the y will be putting that under a different program as a top prior ity. I have gr ave concerns about that. I have always been very frank about my concerns about what was going to happen up there.

We are still looking at a new air term inal building up in Chur c hill, and we hope that the federal Go vernment will honour that comm itment. We also have further dust-proofing that was requir ed. I hope that obliga tion will be met. However, as I ind icated in our di scussion earlier on, when I had my Dir ector of Transporta tion, Jim Walla ce, here, tha t we are meeting with the federal Government. Right now my di rector is meeting with the federal cou nterparts. I had hoped that this would have happened during the cou rse of the summ er. However, that did not develop that way.

We are making conta ct now to set up the meetings. My unde rstan ding with the federal Min ister at that time was that after staff had come up with a variety of options we would then get together and see whether we could work out some arrangements. I am not happy with the time that it is taking. Certainly we will keep the pressure on and see whether we can come up with some long- 1697

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 term options for Chur ch ill. We have gone through this scenario earlier on, once already. We can go through it again if we want. The reason why ther e are no mo nies th ere is because there is no agreement at the present ti me, and the monies that were expended last year was the comp letion of that portion of the agreement where we had responsibil ity in. * (15 10 ) Mr. Mandrake: Mr.

Chair man , that is exactly what I am worried about, that now that the agreement is going to be termi nated , in the press release by the federal Min ister, he said that either remote areas are going to be reco nsider ed in a year's time. Everything is coming to fruition and in a ye ar's time we are probably not even going to have any kind of passenger or frei ght going into Chur chill, and that is a very, very deep co ncern to me.

I appr eciate that this Min ister has written the federal Min ister num erous letters, but I think it is tim e that we stopp ed writing letters and we are going to have to probably go visit our Prime Min ister of Canada and explain to him exact ly what this Prim e Min ister has done to Manitoba. He has completely devastated our econ omy. We just rec ently found out that we might be losing 67 4 VIA employees. Prior to that, it was CN empl oyees. I mean , how much more can the econ omy of Manitoba stan d?

So I would urge the Min ister to take a more aggressive stand with the federal Min ister of Transport and come up with an agreement that is going to stand the tim e and is going to have some substance to it. I am not saying it did not have before. Do not get me wrong, but the way the federal Min ister is operating right now, I do not kno w, it saddens me the way he is operating. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman , let me put some corr ect ion on there. There is not 600-and -some- odd VIA empl oyees that are going to be laid off, it is 214.

I believe that I quoted the figur e the other day already which is a mag nitude concern regardless of what we do. Mr. Chair man, we can go through the whole Churchill de bate again as we did the other day. I am prepar ed to repeat again the whole issues of the concerns that I have, what I perso nally feel and what I would like to acco mplish to some deg ree, but I think I have put that on the record already.

However, I have to ind icate that- 1 will repeat this aspect of it: I am committed to mak ing sure that Churchill contin ues to operate and I would like to see more than just this year to year knee-jerk reac tion which we end up doing at this stage of the game. I ind icated the other day that from the time when the population of Chur ch ill was 7,000 people, we are down to less than 1,000 now. I do not kno w the precis e number but cer tainly whatever has happened to date has not been posit ive.

It has gone the wrong way, and we either ha ve to decide to get some long -ter m co mmitment to make Chur ch ill, if not viable, an entity in Canada and in Manitoba, because at the rate we are going now the grain movement is just one aspect of it. There has to be a much more general pla n developed in terms of what we are going to do with Chur ch ill because a tremendous amount of money has been put into that comm unity over a period of years, and we still do not see a positiv e ligh t on the horizon as far as the future is concerned. I look back over the hi story, Mr. Chair man .

I had some terrible trepidations about Churc hill when I started off because for a while the way the grain movement was last year with only two ships, and for a while it look ed like there might not be any movement thr ough there this year. Fortunately we have some, but that is almost like it is some kind of temporary appeasement that we get. I want to see something much more defin ite than that. In order to have that, ther e has to be a desir e by the federal Government which is their respons ibil ity. They are the decision makers in this case with the port, as well as CN, and many other aspects of it.

They have a responsi bili ty to gi ve us some indic ation for the future as to whether Chur c hill will survive or not. It is to that end that I am tryi ng to see whether we can be more defi nit ive and work at all aspects of it, indic ating onc e again that I am fully comm itted to do whatever I can to keep the com mun ity of Churc hill going. Mr. Mandrake: I appreciate the Min ister's answer. The reason why I brought that up is because we have hashed this over before on the Chur ch ill lin e. Now without further adieu, if the Member for Chur ch ill (Mr . Cowan) has any questions, we can proceed . Mr.

Cowan: I believe my col league, the critic for Hig hways and Transportation, the Memb er for Dauphin (Mr . Pl ohman) indic ated that I could not attend when this matter was being dis cu ssed during the regular Estimates due to other commitments, and I would be here at this stage to make some comments on the Chur ch ill situation. I will put those comments in the conte xt of the situation as I und erstand it. Certainly the federal Government has a responsibil ity, a prim e responsibi lity and a fair sphere of influenc e over what happens in Churc hill. That has always been the case.

In the past, many of our battles were with the federal Government with respect to the lack of ac tion and activity for Churc hill, the por t and the commu nit y. We fought very long and hard on many different issues to bring about certa in ac tions and ac tivit ies on their part which we felt had potential for benefitt ing Chur c hill. However, we are now not in that posi tion to speak dir ectly to the federal Government except on very specific occa sions when at great time, energy and expense we undertake to do so.

The Min ister is in a much better position to speak dir ectly to the federal Government and to speak dir ectly to the public of Manitoba with respect to what the federal Government does or does not do regard ing the future of Chur c hill. I do not believe that this Mini ster has done enough, and I say that somewhat hesitantly because I lik e the Minis ter as an indi vidual. I believe that he has tried very hard to do as much as he can and perhaps he has done as much as he can, I am not cer tain, but giv en the benefit of the doubt I think he would certai nly strive to do so. 1698

Tuesda� October 10, 1989 Having said all that, it has not been enough. It has not been enough because last year we had a devastating year for the Port of Chur chi ll. As the Minis ter indic ated earlier , this year was starting out to be the same. Quite frankly I do not belie ve it was until there was a gr ass roots lobby that went to meet dir ectly with Min ister Boucha rd and Min ister Mayer that we had any firm commi tment that the Port of Chur chi ll would have a shipping season at all this year.

As a matter of fact, if one would go through the public comment ary, through the med ia, lead ing up to that, one would see very clearly that Mr. Mayer, Mr. Boucha rd and other federal Minis ters in cludin g Jake Epp were speak ing qui te dispara gingly about Churc hill. They were giving rise to many conc erns that there would be no shipping season at all. They made comme nts to that effect that cer tainly impl ied that would be the case if they did not state so explicit ly. It was at a mee ting of the gr ass-roots lobb y organ ization led by my Leader, myself and Mr.

Rod Murphy , the Mem ber for the federal constituenc y of Chur c hill, that we saw the fi rst spark of hope, the fi rst ray of hope, fir st bit of a turna rou nd. It was at that time that we were able to ind icate there looked lik e there might be a shipping season this year. It was this Party that broke the news that there was going to be about 300,000 ton nes shipp ed through the por t this year, and it is my under stan ding that would now come pretty close to 280,000 ton nes in seven ship s.

I think the credit for that should not go to any particular Par ty but should go to a very strong lobby effort that incl uded grass-roots organiza tions, not onl y from this provinc e but from other provi nc es, who stated very clearly that if there was no shipping season at the Port of Churchill this year the federal Go vernme nt was going to pay very dearly for it in poli tical terms. I think that had a large effect on what happened and did in fact result in a mod erate shipping season this year.

I would have only hoped that the Min ister would have undertaken to lead that sort of lob by; I would ha ve only hop ed that the Minis ter would have und ertaken to be mor e force ful in his presenta tions; I would have onl y hoped that the Min ister would have taken the steps that are necessary to let the federal Go vernme nt kno w very clearly that this is a battle which we do not intend to lose, it is a battle which we intend to continue until we have a fair share for the Port of Chur c hill. * (1 520) I have to lay some fault at the door step of the Li berals as wel l, Mr .

Chai rperso n, for not agreeing to the reco mmendation that the Canadian Wh eat Board be directed to ship at least 3 percent of Canada's grain exports through the Port of Chur c hill on an annual basis, at least an average of 3 perc ent. That, by the way, was a reco mmendation agreed to by the entir e group that went to Ottawa earlier in the year to lobby on behalf of the Port of Chur chi ll. The group also, after the meeting with the Minis ter, said tha t they would conti nue to put forward that rec ommendation.

I would ask the Minis ter, having said that he would like to see mo re than just a year-to-year knee-jerk react ion to the problems at Chur ch ill and ind icating that the onl y way we could avoid that would be to obtain a long- term comm itment to the Port of Churc hlll, why is it that his Go vernment will not com mit to pr ess uring the federal Go vernment .t o di rect the Canadian Wheat Board to ship an average of at least 3 percent of Canada's grain exports thr ough the Port of Chur ch ill on an annual basis? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr.

Chairman, first of all, the Mem ber made some reference to not wanting to be too hard on me, but he felt he had to be critical. We do not want to unne cess arily pat each other on the back on the eve of our 12 th anniv ersary, which is tomorr ow in case the Member has forgot ten. If we talk of the Mem ber representing Chur chi ll for 12 years, he is giving a fair amount of advice here in terms of the shortco mings of this Government in terms of ho w we make repr esenta tion to th e federal Government.

I hope the Mem ber is not going to try and indic ate that just because they went down as a thir d official Opp osit ion Party in the province, and having that same mode at the federal level, that their trip down there was the main reason for the movement of grain. I think that would be irresponsible if you thought that, because most cer tainly that myself, our Government, federal cou nterparts, there has been a lot of lobbying going on, the fact that they happene d to chose that, the fact that they went down at that ti me.

I have to indic ate that I was not happy with the fact that they gave an ind ica tion at that titne that they were ready to move when they had not gi ven me that ind ica tion. I felt critical of that approach, but let them not try and ind icate that their trip down there scared the federal Government into making that kind of a decision. When you can see the kind of decision the federal Go vernment just made on VIA Rail, cer tainl y they were not shiveri ng in their boots, and scar ed. They just made that kind of a commitm ent at that stage of the game to alle viate gett ing more pressure.

That I think would be ir responsi ble, that kind of a statement. If we look at the total record of Chur ch ill, Mr. Chairman, including the 12 years that the Mem ber has represented it, he says, well, they acco mpl ished a lot. They did not acc ompli sh that much. In fact , I have to be critical of the last 20 years of Government because it has been a downslide from a long time ago, when we used to have the Americans in there, when we used to ha ve mo re fed eral participation in there. It has been a losing battle and it is going downhill.

That is the point that I was trying to make, tha t I do not kn ow whether I and my depar tment, or whether this Government can turn it arou nd, but cer tainly I feel that it has to be add ressed on that scale ind ica ting that we cannot continue this kind of thing. Ultima tely, for whatever reasons that the federal Governme nt can find that we do not get a long term comm itment, we are facing the potential of their closing the port for whatever reason or the rail lin e for whatever reason at any gi ven time.

I do not think tha t is adequate. 1699 I think that I am hop eful and determ ined that I want som e kind of commitm ent out of the fed eral

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 Gov ern ment as to the future of Chur c hill. Aside from the pr ovi ncial responsi bil ities that we have, the various things that we have going right now, I think that unless ther e is that de sir e and comm itment by the federal Govern ment, and I do not care who it is, who is the Party in power at the time, that ther e has to be some desire to say there is going to be a future for Chur chi ll 20 years from now, and start add ressing it in that light.

We have cases, we can lik en the sc enario of some of the Maritime provinc es where a lot of federal mo ney is pumped in and it is not necessarily a viable operation, but the y do it because of the regional aspect of it. I think this is the kind of approach that we have to use for Chur chill and see whether we can get something more definite. I am very conc erned . That concern has not jus t de veloped. The problems ju st have no t developed in the last year and five months that I have been Mi nister.

These problems were there for a long time before that, developing just lik e I indic ated they developed with VIA Rail. In VIA Rail's case, if the problem had been addressed head-on possi bly 20 years ago, we would have had a � system in place that would have been mor e viable, , more ec onomical. We would have had new units on the road, ther e would have been a future maybe for VIA.

At the present time, we deal with it now, decisions get made, and tha t is what concerns me, tha t we do not have that kind of a situation developing at Chur c hill where they say, well, nothing is viable and ther efore we will quit putting mo ney in. It is from that point of view that I say that we have to have some lo nger -term comm itments.

I have raised this both with the federal Minis ter, with CN, with Ports Canada, with the Wheat Board , addr essing the aspect of the question that the Member finally came up with , which was whether he was disappoint ed with the app roach tha t we would not req uest the federal Go vernment to force the Wheat Board to have a comm itment of 3 percent. I do not kno w whether that, the Member full well knows the operati ons of the Wheat Board , and he does not neces sarily agree with the conc ept that the Wheat Board is an arm's-length entit y from Gover nment and it should not be subject to in fluenc e by that.

We could use that same appl ica tion with Crown corpora tions, that sup posed ly I could use th at with people like my motor transpor t board who are a qua si-judicial board arm 's length from the Go vernment. If it was that easy to go and do some thing of that nature, I think it would have alr eady been done. It would have been done by the previous adminis tration. The fact is that if you are going to use that kind of an approach with the Whe at Board , the Member is fully aware that half of the farmers would be up in arms and hue and cry about int erference with the Wheat Board .

It is for that reason that our main Opp osition Party, the Li berals as well as the Cons ervatives, feel sensit ive about going and telling the Wheat Board, you shall. Our conv ersations with them have been to the point where we would li ke to have this 3 percent comm itted somewhere along the line, but as far as being able to take that kind of a position and forcing them to ship 3 percent through there, tha t is, I think, not being respo nsi ble. · Mr.

Cowan: In deed , it would be irresponsible if I were to suggest that it was as the result of the third Party going down to Ottawa that we obtained the type of comm itment that we obtained this year. I have been very careful not to do that on any occa sion, including tod ay. If the Min ister had li stened more carefu lly to my words, or unde rstood them more clear ly, he would have und erstood that I did not say that. I said it was as the result of a delega tion of gr ass roots organiza tions.

As the result of a delega tion that inclu ded Den nis Delaro nde, president of the local union at the Port of Chur ch ill and also a representative of the Manitoba Metis Federat ion in Chur c hill. It was a delegation tha t includ ed Mr. John Hromichuk, president of the Churc hill Cham ber of Com merce. It inc luded Mr. Mark ln gerbrigts on, Mayor of Churchill . It in clude d Mr. Charlie Phelps, the presi dent of the Hu dson Bay Route Assoc iation. It include d Mr. Don Figurs ki, chai rperson of the Port of Chur ch ill Development Board. It incl uded Mr .

Stan Geddes, the Mayo r of Lynn Lake and chairp erson of the No rthern Ma ni toba Reg ional Development Corpora tion at the time. It include d Mr. Ken Collin, Deputy Mayor of Thomps on. It in clude d Mr. Terry Hendr ickson of The Pas-Port of Churchill Promotion Comm ittee. It inc luded the Leader of the New Democratic Party, Mr. Gary Doer. It inc lude d the Hig hways and Transpor tation Critic for the Ne w Democra tic Party, Mr. John Plohman. It in cluded the future member for the commun ity of Chur c hill, soon to be inclu ded in the constituenc y of Rupertsl and, Mr. Elijah Harper.

It incl uded the Mem ber for Thompson and a previous mem ber of the Por t of Churchill Development Board , Mr. Steve Ashton, and of course it incl uded Mr. Rod Murp hy, MP for the area, and myself. It was the breadth and the nature of that grass-roots lobby effort that I believe provoked a posit ive respons e from the federal Gov ernment with resp ect to announcing that there would be a shipping program. The Min ister may be upset with the way in which it was done. He said he was, that it was made at that particular time, but the fact is I do not think it would have been made otherwise.

I base that not on just the experience of that particular trip alone last June. I base it on the experienc e of the year previous when we had simi lar difficulty in getting any comm itment to grain shipm ents through the Port of Church ill from the federal Government.

It was not until the day that we had a gr ass-roots lobby meeting in this particu lar building that in that case was organ ized by the Min ister of Hi ghways and Transportation, that we had any ind ication the re would be any ships at all coming to the Port of Chur chi ll last year. * (1 530) What that tells me is that when you have two specific ins tances of where annou ncements were made on the days the grass-roots lobby efforts were undergoing, or were being undertaken , that grass-roots lobby effort had something to do with tho se decisions.

I believe it on the basis of the facts before us, the empir ical evidence. I also believe it on philo sophic al grounds. I believe that if you want to bring pressure to bear on a Go vern ment which is sup po sed ly responsible to the people tha t elect it, then you have the people that elect it bring that pressure to bear as 1700

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 forci bly as they can. Certainly we have a role to play as elected representatives of those people, but I believe that role is str engthened , in parti cular when in Op posi tion, when those people are along the side of us and we are alongside of them as equals asking for ac tion to be taken .

Gi ven that it has worked twice in the past and gi ven that we have an uncer tain situation as to not only the conti nuation of this year's season but also next year's season, is the Min ister prepar ed to more forcibly put together a grass-roots lobbying effort that will carry on the work of putting pressure to bear on the federal Government to ensure that Churc hill receives its fair share of Cana da's gr ain expor t ship ments on an ongoing basis? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr.

Chai rman, I have indic ated at many ti mes that I suppor t the concept of havi ng 3 percent of the expor t grains mo ved through the Port of Chur c hill. I have no di fficu lty with that. If I was a decision-maker I would make that decisi on, because I feel very proud of Manitoba and very selfish about Manitoba in that respect . How to go about getting that? The Mem ber says, well, develop a gr ass- roots-w e have gone through this when we had our commit tee sitting at one stage of the game, you kno w, how we should devel op the kind of pressure that can be brought to bear on the federal Government.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr s. Carstairs) says get up and scre am, have the Premier (Mr . Filmon) phone the Prime Min ister. I do not kno w what mo re pressur e could be applied than h aving all the Min ister s of Hig hways and Transpor tation across the countr y, for example, put pressure on the federal Min ister and have him there in the room when we were debating this, getting into a bit of a scuffle almos t, not scuffle but into a bit of a tiff in front of the media about this kind of thing. If that is not pressure, then I do not kno w what pressure is.

The idea, and this is possi bly where we dif fer in terms of opinion how we should do this, whether we stand on the corner and scream and yell, and hue and cry type of thing, or where we cons tantly try and work and negotia te. How to apply pressure is a matter of concept. There is the public way of doing it or the way that the system basically makes provision for in terms of Min ister to Min ister , Go ver nment to Go ver nment, in terms of bringing forward this pressure.

You kno w, I just do not agree with the fact that we should take and round up a train load of people and go to Ottawa because I feel that would not necessar ily be the way to get that kind of respo nse. We will cont inue to try and get a com mi tment, if possible a long- term comm itment, from the federal Government for the futur e of Chur ch ill. Obviousl y, Mr. Chairman, the previous admin istration did not gett hat commi tment. I am not ind ica ting I can get that commitment, but most cer tainly their approach, whatever way it was at that time, was not success ful.

I am hoping that mine will be, and if not I will face the cons equences of that regretfully, very regretfully. I am certai nly going to do everything possi ble before anything 1701 of that natur e would happen. I ha ve my way of appr oaching it, together with my Government and, as I say, the Mem ber well has his ideas how that should be do ne, but his app roach has not been successful either in gett ing a lon g-term commitment for the future of Chur c hill. Mr. Cowa11: The whole system is falling down around you.

The rail system, the port system is falling down around your ears, and you want to play by Queens berry rules. The fact is that ther e is a federal Governme nt that shows no commitment at all to the Port of Churc hill, to the Hu dson Bay lin e, to the VIA service in the area, to the com mun ity of Chur chill, or to the No rth of Manitoba in general, and they show no com mitme nt because they think they can get away with it. That federal Cons ervativ e-a nd I und erscore the word Cons ervative-Go vernment in Ottawa will do anything that it can believe it will get away with.

That is the shor t and long of it right there. As long as the Min ister wants to play the di ploma tic channels game and not come out and be force ful in a public mann er on the Port of Chur ch ill and the future of the rail li ne, we are going to end up with the type of results th at we have to date. Let the re be no doub t about it because the record is very clear . The two worst seasons, going back for decades with respect to the Port of Chur c hill, have taken place sinc e this Min ister assumed office. That is not some thing to be proud of.

That is some thing to be ashamed of, and if he is not ashamed of it, then we are ashamed of it for him, qui te frank ly. You canno t play in the backrooms and the corri dor s of power when you are being shafted in the way in which you are being sh afted and expect to get results. The results have come about as a result of public pressure, no more, no less, and they will only con tinue to come about as the results of public pressure. You are going to have to take the glo ves off with your federal cou nterpart. I realize how di fficult that is for you. I realize that they are the same pol itical stripe as you.

I realize that you share many philo soph ical points with them, many philo soph ical appr oaches with them. I understand that you feel a duty to protect them. An Honourable Member: Bull. Mr. Cowan: Well, the Min ister from his seat says, "bull." Well, then get out and state publicly what it is they are doing to the Port of Chur ch ill and the Hudson Bay rail line and why it can no longer be left alone, why it can no longer be suffered in silence, as the Min ister is doing? He has had to be pushed and prodde d and ca joled into every ac tion he has taken.

He has shown no ini tiative of his own with respect to deal ing with this problem in a public way. Every public initia tive has been gen erated from ar ound him, no t from with in his department or his office . He has tried to protect the Min ister when he came to town and we wanted to make him publi cly acc ountable. We wanted to have him meet with the comm ittee, the all-Pa rty comm ittee, which the Min ister said he struck to have tho se sorts of meetings,

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 and yet he was protected by the Min ister from doing so. It was not until we forced our way into a meeting with him that we even got the cou rtesy of a few words from him. The Min ister's approach is not work ing, and the proof of the pudding is in the figu res. He said that we did very li ttle for the Port of Chur chi ll, tha t our appr oach did not work. Well, the fact is we had a five-year agreement. Where is that five-year agreement now? It shows up as a zero, as a nought, as nothing on the Es tima tes book.

Can the Min ister ind icate what the status of the negotia tions for the continua tion of that five-year agreement are at the present time? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, the Member can get vexed and excited all he wants. He gets nervous when I tell him that his reco rd - Mr. Cowan: My record is very clear , very clear . Mr. Albert Driedger: -o f the previous admin istra tion is not good either . You have no commitment for a long term future for the Port of Chur chill, you have none. Look at the reco rd.

The popula tion used to be 7,000 people there and it is down to less than 1,0 00 and you take a lot of credit for that. Let us not talk about our record versus yours. You like to hang your hat, the Mem ber lik es to hang his hat on the fact that we both kno w that the federal Government is the same Party as ours. He has no idea what my di scussions with the federal Min ister are. Mr. Cowan: Well, then tell us, that is what I want to hear. Mr. Albert Driedger: Well, I have indicated all the time the position I have put forward. I have put my position forward with Mr.

Lawless from CN; I have dealt with Por ts Canada; I have dealt with the Wheat Board; I have dealt with Charlie Mayer; I have dealt with Benoit Bouch ard, ind ica ting that we want the kind of 3 percent comm itment that we wanted . The fact that the Mem ber can sit here and yell and scream about what he has done and what he would do has not brought any better results than what I am doing right now.

The fact that we had a drought situation last year, the lobbying, I have ind icat ed, if the Mem ber wan ts he can back in Hansard and see exact ly the dis cussion we had the other day where I ind ica ted that I think the lobbying of the comm ittee that we had at that time helped bring about at least two ships last year when there was none desig nated. Mr. Cowan: What about the lobby this year? Mr. Albert Driedger: Well, the lobby this year, if the Mem ber wants to take credit for that, he can take credit for it.

I do not care, but if he feels that the fact that he and some people went do wn ther e made the difference in terms of the decision-mak ing, when he says the federal Governme nt is not listening to anybody anyway, how do you think that they would be li stening to you and your delega tion, that that forced that kind of a decision? 1702 Mr. Chairman, we can go around the bush on this one many, many ti mes. I have my comm itment to Churc hill, which is just as ded icated as yours is. Maybe my approach is di fferent from your, but yours had not produc ed that many results either . Mr.

Cowan: The Min ister's approach, his commitment, and his views have resulted in the worst two shippin g seasons in the his tory of the Port of Chur c hill. That is how effective it has been. The figur es do not li e. If he wants to look back at the reco rd, let him look back at the Lyon years and what happened dur ing those years with the Port of Chur ch ill and The Pas from the grain ship ments. * (1 540) It was not until the 1981 elec tion that we saw those shipme nts go up again.

It was not until the New Democratic Party admin istration that we saw the long term commitments start to be put in place with respect to the federal-pr ovi ncial agreement which now appears to be going no where un der another Conser vat ive Government. I am not saying that the Min ister at the federal level does not lis ten to anybody. I did not say that at all. The Minis ter has not lis tened to me if tha t is what he has inferred or taken from my comments.

I have said that they only lis ten to public pressure, that they do not lis ten to the words that he whisp ers in the Min ister 's ears in the back rooms of the Parliament in Ottawa and the back rooms of this Legislature. They lis ten only to public pressure. The fact that the Minis ter ind icated that last year's lobby effort, which was a public init iative, acc ompl ished something, and the fact that this year we got an announc ement on the same day that we had a public lobby very clearly indic ates to me that they lis ten to only one thing.

That is what I am asking the Min ister to do, to cast aside his own pol itical loyalt ies and his own politi cal needs to protect his cou nterparts in Ottawa and put before them, prio rize before them, the future of the Port of Chur c hill. The specific question to the Min ister was, what is the status of the Canada-Ma nitoba Chur ch ill Agreement? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, the Mem ber goes on with that tir ade about all kinds of things, so I will take the oppor tunit y to answer on it before I answer the question.

I ind icated the Member might as well get his head out of the sand as well, in terms of the record. When he talk s about what my record is and what his record is for 12 years when he has been the representative for Churc hill, no commi tment, period, no long- term comm itment at all, period. He talks about public pressure. That is his prerogative in terms of how he wants to apply public pressure. If you feel the federal Min ister gi ves in to public pressure then he would have broken his back with VIA Rail, which obviously he had a treme ndous amount of public pressure to, of no avail. The decision was made.

If you want to use that appr oach it is your prerogative, but I think you are naive if you are saying that by stand ing and yelling with public pressure you are going to make a decision different ly.

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 Obviously the federal Govern ment has sho wn, and I am not protect ive of them, that if they want to make a decision they make it regard less of pu blic sent iment or public pressure, which is what has happened in the last li ttle while. I am not defens ive of th at either , or my position I have in terms of VIA Rail or with Churc hill. I made that comm itment . When he wants to talk on the record he puts out his paper, he says look at the record of me as Minis ter and what they have done in the past.

Well, just look at what has happened to your popula tion figur es sinc e you got elected in '77. Let us com pare that and then tell me you have done a good job for them. Talking about what the status is of our pr esent situation with the negotia tions, I had just ind ica ted before, I did that already the other day, that my staff is negot fating with the federal Min ister's staff in terms of looking up what options there are, at which stage of the game we will sit down and see whether we can come up with something that is going to be of a long lasting nature for the Port of Chur c hill. Mr.

Cowan: If anyone has his or her head in the sand it is the Minis ter, who has been caught off guar d so ma ny ti mes by serious bl ows to Ma nitoba's transpor tation network, including the Port of Churc hill, that he has become somewhat wobbly and unstable when the issues are dis cuss ed.

Here is a Min ister that stands up in the Hous e day after day and says, well, I did not realize they were going to make th ose sorts of massiv e cuts, well, I had assuran ces that we would have consu ltations before they made those sorts of massive cuts, well, I though t we would have a better shipping season for the Port of Chur c hill, I did not kno w, I did not kn ow, my good ness, my good ness, and he wrings his hands.

Well, the fact is that the cuts are going on around him day by day, that the two worst shipping seasons in the hi story of the Port of Chur c hill have been while he has been Mi nis ter, and he has not done anything to cor rect that situa tion. The fact is he has failed, and failed miserably when it comes to encou raging the more effective use of the Port of Churc hill .

It is because he is afraid to take on his cou nterparts in Ottawa, it is because he is afraid to take on the system th at has always lob bied long and har d agains t the Port of Chur c hill, and it is because he has colle agues in his own caucus who for far too long ha ve been critic al, sile ntly critical in some ins tanc es, more openly critical in others, of the Port of Churchill and its use. So the fact is that the Por t has suffered under a Con servative Go vern ment, suffered un der the Cons ervative Government federally and suffered under the Cons ervative Govern ment provi ncial ly.

Earlier the Min ister said he was going to involv e the all- Party comm ittee that was struck by resolution of this Ho use in determ ining options for ne g ot iati ons for the con tinua tion of the Canada-Ma nitoba Agreement . Why has tha t in volvement not hap pened ? Why has the all Party comm ittee not met for months now while the situation has deterio rated under the stewardship of this Min ister? Mr. Albert Driec:lger: Well, Mr. Chairman, let me fi rst of all ind icate to the Mem ber that he questions my capabil ity about gett ing inf ormation from CN and from the federal Government.

I will tell you someth ing. The interesting thing is when his collea gue, the critic of Hig hways and Transpor tation (Mr . Mand rake), made a statement the other day about 10 positions being moved to Edmonton, that was false in formation he put on the record as well, that there is only one position that is being trans ferred to Edmon ton and six positions are being deleted here but not being trans ferred. It is a matter of how you play with these words, and the Mem ber has always, over the years that I have kn own him, had the kn ack of doing that. Mr. Chairman: Shall the item pass? Mr.

Cowan: No, the item shall not pass just yet. Mr. Chairman, I am asking why has the all- Party commit tee not met sinc e much earlier in the year, and why has the Minis ter not kept his prom ise to the all- Party comm ittee to involve them in reviewing the options for the exten sion of the Canada -Manitoba Churchill Agreement? Mr. Albert Driedger: No w th at we are do wn to questions, then I will try- Mr. Cowan: They were asked before. Mr. Albert Driec:lger: After you make a long speech, you ask a question . Mr. Cowan: Well, make an answer, after you make a long speech. Mr. Chairman: Order, please. Order. Mr.

Albert Driedger: That is what I am going to do now. Mr. Chairman, the all- Party comm ittee was formed last year when ther e was grave concern about no gr ain com ing through the Port of Church ill. At that time, there was an all- Party comm ittee with two Mem bers from the NOP, th ree from the Li berals, and three from the Cons ervative Party. We met at various occa sions. We ha ve, I think, de veloped a sc enario of putting tremendous pressure on . The Member does not have to have that all repeated exactly how we went about that.

We met this year agai n, earli er on in the year, looking at add ressing the concerns of Chur c hill . At that tim e a sc enario was developed that we should use an app roach -w e could not get agreement within the · comm ittee in terms of how we should deal with this situation. I took the propo sal the New Democ rats brought forward and we took it back to our caucus. They could not agree with the kind of conc ept and app roach that was being presented . As a result of that, we did not feel that to get together in the comm ittee and argue if we could not agree . Last 1703

Tuesday, October 10, 1989 year there was a uni fied app roach in terms of we all wanted one thing, all of us, and tha t was to get gr ain thr ough there. We managed to get I think, through the lobby efforts, some grain moved. This year it would appear, and it appeared at that time we would not have any grain moving through the Port of Churchill either . However, that appr oach that was being used and was forwarded by the Ne w Democratic Party was such that, in my opinion, I felt the comm ittee could not function properly and achie ve what they did last year.

It was for that reason that I did not call the commit tee. Subsequent to that, we did receive information about a prog ram being developed for the Port of Churc hill. That does not mean that the act ivities, just because the comm ittee has not been meeting, in supp ort of Chur c hill have not gone on. I have ind icated before that we have an int erdepar tmental comm ittee that is working on a variety of options. We are looking at cha nging, as I indic ated at that time, the Port of Chur ch ill Development Board .

If the Mem ber wants to wave his fla g about the acc ompl ishments that they had , it was during their tenure that the Saskatche wan-Al berta Governm ents wit hdrew their funding for the Port of Chur c hill. We went back and tried to get that commitment, thought I had the commitment, did not get it, and subsequent to that have formed the Church ill Development Board not the Port of Chur chi ll Development Board -which will be funded through Manitoba. We are going to be having Manitoba rep rese nta t ives on there, not representat ives from the other two provinc es.

The reason the commit tee felt, at this stage of the game, in my view, I feel that we have very little to ac comp lish other than argue amongs t ourselves, and I think that is not a positiv e thing to be done at this stage of the game. Mr. Cowan: What specific part of the strateg ic plan for the Port of Chur chill 1989 shipping season, which was presented on February 20 of this year to the Min ister, did his cau cus di sagree with? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman , I do not have that agreement in front of me, I have to go back and review it exact ly.

The Mem ber is well aware of some of the conc erns that were raised by my col leagues that were on the comm ittee. They had some concerns about the way the sc enario was develop ed, in terms of the chart which was ultima tely going to take and ask for resignations, et ce tera, et cetera. These were the thin gs tha t the Mem ber had on there that rai sed some concerns. If you are going to call the comm ittee just to go thr ough the kind of scenario that we are going thr ough here, this is fair, these are the Estima tes and we have the room to do that.

To call a comm ittee together to go through that same pro cess again, I think would be a waste of time. Mr. Cowan: The strateg ic plan for the 3 percent comm itment for the average annual ship ment of Canada's grain export shipme nts through the Port of Chur ch ill went as follo ws, and I would ask the Min ister to stop me where he finds di sagreement or difficulty with the chart. The fi rst step was to request a commitment for an average of 3 percent of all Canada's grain export shi pments through the Port of Churchi ll.

If we received written or firm public comm itment to that 3 percent goal , we would then request specific details in the 19 89 shipping plans. If the federal Government refused to commit to 3 perc ent, we would then request a meeting with the Min ister. If the Min ister -a nd that was the Min ister respo nsible for the Wheat Board -a greed, we would then ask for that firm commitment. If we received the firm commitment, we would ask for a specific plan. If we did not, we would then ask for a meeting with the Prime Minis ter, if the Min ister refused to meet with us or refused to provide that commitment.

If the First Min ister refused to meet with us, we would then enlist the suppor t of all MP s just as had been done here at the provincial level. If the First Minis ter still refused to meet with us at that time, in other words, they refused to giv e us a commitment, we would demand the removal of the Wheat Board Min ister. Now where did the Min ister find fault with that strateg ic plan? Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Chairman, I thought I would outline exact ly what I did. At that time when the New Democra tic Party came forward with their propo sal, I took it back to my col leagues.

They viewed it, they said it was not acce ptable and left it at that. I have indic ated all along that the first portion of that proposal, which was at 3 perc ent, I have always suppor ted and will continue to support, and I feel justi

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-2-46
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 2nd hansardpdf 46.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	2723f3cf00bac1bda3d78b4e44102bf70a707d57

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