Manitoba Hansard — 10 February 1960 (Sitting 17, 26th Legislature, 2nd Session)

26-2-17

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly Of Manitoba DEBATES arid PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable A. W. Harrison Volume IV No. 17 February 10, 1960 2nd Session, 26th Legislature Printed by R. S. Evans. Queen's Printer for the Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg

DAILY INDEX Wednesday, February 10, 1960, 2:30p.m. Introducti'on Bill 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . • • . . • . • . . • . . . . . . • • . . . . . . • • . • • • 397 Committee of Supply Provincial Secretary: Manitoba Gazette •. , • • . . . . . . • . . . • . • . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • • . • . . • 398 Civil Service Commission . . . . . . . • • . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . • • • . • . . . . • . • . • • 398 The Progressiv e Index of Votes and Proceedings will be published on Tuesdays on the last page.

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2:30 o'clock, Wednesday, February lOth, 1960 Opening Prayer by Mr. Speaker. 1\:l:R. SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions Reading and Receiving Petitions MR . CLERK: The petition of the Greater Winnipeg Transit Commission praying for the passing of

an Act to amend the Greater Winnipeg Transit Act. MR . SPEAKER: Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees. Notice of Motion In troduction of Bills. The Honourable Member for st.John's. MR. DAVID ORLIKOW (St. John's): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, that leave be given to introduce a Bill No. 80,

An Act to amend the Labour Relations Act and that same be now received and read a first time. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and aJter a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR . SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. HON. STERLING R. LYON (Attorney-General) (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called I should like to take this opportunity to draw to your attenti on Sit, and to the attention of the House, the presence in the gallery on your left, Sir, ofapprox imately 80 Grade VIll students from Dieppe School in Charleswood under their principal Mr. Wherrett.

Now this group is a singularly notorious group because they have just conclud ed, I understand, a mock parliament in their school with respect to parliamentary proceedings, and so on and so forth. I think the House would wish to pay them particular welcome, (

a) be cause of their interest in parliamentary procedure, and (

b) because they come from that very flourishing suburb of Charleswood which happens to be in my constituency. MR. D. L. CAtV!PBELL (Leader of the Opposition) (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that I would like to join with the Honourable the Attorney-General in extending a word of wel come to the folks who are visiting with us today - Grade Vlll in Charleswood. I never care so much for the term "mock parliament" . I' m always afraid they' re talking about us .

But inasmuch as a lot of people use that phrase, I would like to point out that I heard on the very best of authority, that at the parliament wi'>.ich was held there that the supporters of the Liberal Part-y were in the vast majority and had much the best of the argument. · �IIR. EDMOND PREFONTAINE (Carillon) spoke in French and the translation will appear i.11 a later Hansard. HON. J. B. CARROLL (Mi nister of Labour) (The Pas): Mr. Spea.l;:er, before the Orders of the Day I'd like to lay on the table of the House an Order for Return No. 3 and No. 4 on a motion of the Honourable Member for st. John's. HON.

GEORGE HUTTON (Minister of Agricultu re)(Roclnvood-Iberville): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day I'd like to lay on the table the An1mal Report of the Department of Agriculture and Immigration for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 1959. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. MR. CARROLL: Before the Orders of the Day I'd like to answer a question which was raised in the House a few days ago by the Honourable the Member for St. Boniface, who is asking about the discontinuance of the publication by the M.

T .S. entitled 'Who called Me?" This was discontinued in February of 1956, and we understand that it was discontinued because it didn't have the kind of public acceptance that they felt it should have had in order to continue. There were some administrative problems in keeping the numbers up to date and there was a very substantial loss with respect to this particular publication.

Now it will be of interest to the House to know that before it was discontinued a letter was sent to all those who were in receipt of this particular publication, and they had only, I believe, 17 letters in reply plus 6 phone calls protesting the discontinuance of the service, which is no substantial number in view of the very large expenditures which were made by the system in providing this particular service. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. HON. DUFF ROBLIN (Premier) (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce --or in this case the Honourable Provincial ..

February loth, 1960 Page 397

(Mr. Roblin, cont'd) •.••. Secretary, -- that Mr. Speaker do 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 presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the supply to be granted to Her Majesty. · MR. SPEAKER: Would the Honourable Member for st. Matthews please take the chair. MR . CHAIRMAN: Department IV, Provincial Secretary - Appropriation No . 3, Manitoba Gazette. HON. GURNEY EVANS (Provincial Secretary) (Fort Rouge): Mr.

Chairman, we give the information that there are two employees in the Manitoba Gazette compared with two the previous year. MR. RUSSELL PAULLEY (Leader of the CCF) (Radisson): Mr. Chairman, talking of the Manitoba Gazette, I find it a very interesting publication. It contains a lot of information that is worthwhile insofar as proclamation of acts and also the regulations of the acts. And I think it's annually or it may be semi -a nnually that we do receive in the -- appended to the Gazette -- an index of the changes in regulations that have been made in the months preceding the publication of the index.

Now I don't know whether anything could be done so that annually we receive a copy-- or semi- annually -- a copy of the changes which have been made in the regulations rather than the present method of having to retain and thumb back over past copies of the Gazette in order to find the changes which are made in the regulations and also the proclamations of the acts.

I think it would facilitate those who have to study the matters of changes in regulations and proclamations if it were possible ,;._ and I appreciate the fact that what I'm suggesting would entail another publication -- but I'm wondering whether or not it might be worth it and worthwhile so that those pertinent things to possibly a greater number other than those under the Trustee Act and the likes of that -- if that could not be done and whether or not the Minister might take it under consideration. MR. EVANS: A further comment, Mr. Chairman?

That's a suggestion that I'd be glad to give some consideration to; frankly it has not been raised before. I think it's a subject that might well be considered when I believe legislation or some arrangement is being brought forward by the First Minister in connection with regulations later in the session. And certain ly I will retain this idea and consider it, and we may find that both our questions in this connec tion are answered later on .. But Pm very glad to have the suggestion. MR .

CAMPBELL: I was going to ask if we have any -- if the Minister can give us any esti.mate of the revenue that has accrued -- the increase in revenue that has accrued to the publication of the Gazette through the increase.d fees that were put into effect some time ago? MR. EVANS: I haven't that information myself, Mr. Chairman, and it will be made available at a later date . MR . CAMPBELL: On what item, Mr. Chairman, would it be made available? MR. ROBLIN: •.... revenue, Mr. Chairman, and something that we will have to debate when we get to the Revenue Estimates for the year.

I haven't got any more information -- the estimates that we have last year on this matter. MR. CAMPBELL: I quite appreciate, Mr. Chairman, that when the budget is before us and the estimates of revenue accompanying it is the time for discussion, but I would think when we're voting the supply to a particular branch such as the Gazette that it would be in order for the Ministe:r to give us some idea of what additional revenue has accrued because of the imposi tion of these further taxes. MR .

EVANS: I'll get the information -- whatever information we can get and bring it back to a later sitting of the Committee if that• s acceptable. MR. CHAIRMAN: (

a) passed; (

b) passed; Resolution 17- Manitoba Gazette $32,880 passed; Item 4 - Civil Service Commission (a) ...• MR. EVANS: I would like to say a few words on this item touching on the Civil Service Commission and the Civil Service generally. Reference was made the other day by the Honour able Member for.Selkirk to the Civil Service itself, the Manitoba Civil Service, as probably the best provincial Civil Service in Canada. I think that is true. I've had some connection with civil services and some opportunity to attend the Civil Service Assembly in the United states where are gathered together those in the public service of not only the Federal Page 398 February lOth, 1960

(Mr. Evans, cont'd) ••.. Governments of both Canada and the United states and the proVinces and the states, but also many of the municipal governments of both countries -- some of them very large. When you think of such cities as New York and Chicago and San Francisco, and their population you realize what large and important matters they have to deal with. On those occasions I formed the conclusion that there was no civil service which exceeded ours in quality, in devotion to their work and in the way they discharged all their duties.

I think it might be thought to be boastful if we said we were the best, but I would say that we ranked certainly in the front rank of civil services on the North American Continent, and I have had some occasion to come to know them.

I have had some occasion to know our own Civil Service too, and if members will forgive this reference I would say this, that for three years before I entered the Legislature I was honoured with the appointment of Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, being asked to take that position as an outside person who at that time had no connection with the government itself or with any political connection. And I came to know our Civil Service through dealing with their problems, listening to what, for want of a better word, has been called grievances, and in trying to help to administer our own Civil Service.

And so I think it was right and proper for the Honourable Member for Selkirk to refer to them in as glowing terms as he did. There are problems facing the Civil Service and some of them are not easy of solution. As our economy becomes more diversified so also must the civil servants themselves be diversified in their skills and their trades. And you can hardly find a calling or a profession or an occupation that is not represented in, the Civil Service. But there's perhaps a more fundamental problem than that and it has to do with the function of the civil servant as being an administrator and not a policy maker.

And as the affairs of government become more complex and the responsibilities wider, the responsibility particularly of the senior civil servants grow greater, they take and must take an increasing hand in planning, and where planning crosses the line. into policy is sometimes rather difficult to define. Now I mention this in connection with a particular point, and it's this: that I think it is essential that the Civil Service should remain anonymous.

That is to say, in the normal course of events and as time goes on, governments change, parties alternate or change, and it is right that a civil servant who has loyally carried out the policy of a former administration must be quite free to turn and carry out the policy of any new administration coming in. In order to do that he must remain anonymous in the work that he does. His name must not be associated with a policy which may be defeated at the ne)<i; election. This denies the civil servant himself a good deal of the credit that• s coming to him for what is accomplished by a government.

He is not permitted to be singled out in public and due acknowledgment given for his contribution to the progress of administration in the Province. I think it's just as well for all of us to remember that and to come to the defence of civil servants when thoughtless people will refer to them in any way except the way that they deserve -- which is with great credit. There's a little different angle to this too, and that's the anonymity of the civil servant must be, and is, almost universally respected by the press.

There are many occasions on which information is given to the press by means or through civil servants, and it's important that we continue the tradition in the province of protecting the anonymity of the civil servants themselves. There have in my experience been practically no occasions when the press have not respected that particular position. Now I would like to say something about the administration of the Civil Service during the last 18 months or so, and particularly during the last year.

Honourable members will know of course that there is the Joint Council which consists of representatives of the Manit oba Government Employees' Association and members of the Cabinet who meet together once a month, except in those months in which the Legislature is sitting. It has continued its work during the year but I must report to the House that only five meetings were held during the last year.

The difference is accounted for by the fact that there were two sessions of the Legislature in that period, which if memory serves me, accounts for four months and, of course, there was a provincial election and by-elections, and in discussing this point with the members of the Government Employees• Association they say that they have no complaint on this score for the year in question. Mr. Alec Skene, the Presiuent of the Manitoba Government • Employees• Association stated at their annual convention quite recently in Dauphin-- I have February lOth, 1960 Page 399

(Mr. Evans, cont'd) ..... another plug for Dauphin here -- and I quote from his report that "all meetings were on a man-to-man basis and our negotiations bore considerable fruit. Relations with the Government and the Civil Service Commission continue to remain at a high level. I believe that many important problems were resolved to our satisfaction during the year." I thought itwas right, however, to draw attention to the fact that the number of meetings held was less than usual, being five only. · Changes were made in the manner in which classifications and reclassifications were handled in this administration.

In my day on the Civil Service Commission and subsequently I understand, t�ere was considerable complaint on the part of the employees at delays in · classification or reclassification of positions. I believe that some organization or a body known as the Establishment Committee existed in the last administration, but delays were not of the order of weeks; they were months and sometimes many months before classifica tions were cleared through. Each quarter this government deals with all reclassification requests that come to the attention of the Civil Service Commission.

T:Q.ey are all dealt with and cleared and have been cleared. During the past calendar year 209 reclassifications were approved by the Commission and the Treasury Board, and this compares with 91 in the previous year. Later in the session the House will be asked to consider legislation to bring in a new Civil Service Act. The last Civil Service Act has begun to be inadequate in some respects and. the revision will bring into being the latest and most up to date personnel practices in the field of public administration.

I won't say anything more about that at this time because there will be an ample opporiunity to discuss what is a large Act and we'll have, no doubt, considerable discussion both in the House and in committee, but I just tell the members of the committee that this Act will be coming forward. Now my friend from Selkirk made some reference the other day in debate to the morale· of the Civil Service and I would like to pay some attention to those remarks. He made some use of the term "the old pork barrel".

As I read it his sentence from the transcript that I have is, ''What I am trying to avoid is the old J!lOrk barrel." I take it from my knowledge of the honourable member and from what he said, the wording of what he said, that he was not judging this administration with pork barrel practices. If he had been I would have drawn attention to the fact that the Civil Service Commission is independent of the government. The members of the Commission may be appointed by the government but they can be dis charged from their responsibilities only by a two-thirds vote of this assembly, after of course public debate.

Then and perhaps what is as great a guarantee as any I point to the stature of the Chairman of that Commission, Mr. R.G. B. Dickson, a leading barrister or counsel of this city, a man of standing and integrity who would certainly countenance no such practices. In fact those practices do not exist in this administration. During the course of the year and in fact more than a year ago more authority has been delegated to the Civil Service Commission than formerly.

The salary level up to which the Civil Service can make its own -- the Civil Service Commission can make its own appointments without reference to the Executive Council was raised considerably from former practice and these appointments are being made regularly.

Now to deal more directly with the remarks of the honourable member concerning the morale of the civil service, and I would tie back to one or two of my earlier remarks, and that is, that with regard to morale it is awfully important no matter what the job is for some one to have satisfaction in their work and to receive the approval of people, or to have their worths and their contribution recognized, and so with these anonymous civil servants it is always a problem to ensure that they have satisfaction in their work when as a matter of fact they are denied a good deal of the recognition for it.

And so we are quite keen to foster by every means possible the greatest team spirit within the civil service and the members of it. We think in this connection that the principle of in-service promotions is a very import ant one, and this was the main point dealt with by my honourable friend from Selkirk. This government has carefully considered present civil servants for promotion before bringing in anyone fr0� the outside. That is a matter of policy and it has been followed through care fo.lll::,·.

Positions are bulletined in such a way that people at present in the civil service are given every opportunity to apply and to be considered by the Civil Service Commission and Page 400 February lOth, 1960

(Mr. Evans, cont1d) ...•• any Board established by it for a new position which may be a higher grade than the civil servant was holding at that time. During the calendar year 1959 there were 383 in-service promotions as compared with 224 in 1958, and 261 in 1957. I suggest that a consideration of those figures shows that by a substantial margin this government has given more attention to in-service promotion than the administration that preceded it. Now included in these promotions were many at the very top of the service such as Mr. R. R. Robertson to the Assistant Deputy Minister of Education; Mr. L.

Blackman to Assistant Deputy Minister of Public Works; Dr. E. Johnson from Superintendent of the Selkirk Mental Hospital to Director of Psychiatric Services; Mr. W. Hurd an Apprenticeship Supervisor to Director of Apprenticeship, and others at this level could be cited. I think the members of this House need have no fear that this government is giving due consideration to in-service promotion as a factor in the maintenance of the morale of the civil service and that we regard that morale as being a thing worthy of considerable and continuing attention.

Now in order to help present staff to qualify for promotion we have instituted a new policy. Two staff training programs are now in effect. One an in-service training program and the other what might be called an out-service training program.

The first program was the in-service training program and was aimed at what I think is known in business circles as the middle management levels - those who have attained a certain status of administrative responsibility and who for further progress require as much background and breadth of train ing as possible, and so these middle management levels or executives are given the opportun ity to refresh and strengthen their knowledge and understanding of the general objectives and methods of public administration.

The course consisted in a series of ten weekly lectures covering such topics as the Canadian Federal System; Federal and Provincial financial arrange ments; the role of the civil servant; the economic picture; departmental policy and governr..:e nt , organization and efficiency. Some 36 members of the service or from the Public utilities - attended these lectures. Most of the lecturers were drawn from the senior management levels of the service itself, but two distinguished University of Manitoba professors, Dr. W. L. Morton, Chairman of the Department of History, and Dr.

Saul Sinclair, Professor and Head of the Agricultural Economics and Farm Management, very generously donated their services for this course. I think it should be emphasized that this was a pilot project, that the numbers participating while small, do show a lively interest; we regard the course as having been a success, and the Civil Service Commission will continue that course next year.

Now one of the problems that was referred to or implied in my remarks concerning the diversification of the functions of government and consequently the diversified requirements among the members of the civil service is the fact that we do require more and more highly trained technical people, and it becomes important that people of your own service can be permitted or enabled to improve their technical qualifications so that they can go on for further promotions. Now to help solve this problem a program of out-service training has been instituted.

Under this system two methods of assistance are available to employees who are seeking further academic training; it depends on whether the employee is directed by the government to take a course for improvement or whether he wishes to take such a course for his own improvement, but it is not thought to be in the public interest that he should be sent by his department. Now if a person is directed by his department to take further training, full salary, travelling, tuition and other expenses up to $100 a month are paid.

If a person wishes to take a course directly related to his work -- and I think that phrase is �mportant - where the course has to be directly related to his work but he is not directed to do so by the department, an allowance of up to $250 per month for married personnel and up to $200 per month for single personnel, plus tuition, travelling and expenses may be paid. But of course at that time the civil servant relinquishes the salary that he had been paid up to that point. In both the above mentioned cases the recommendation of the department and the concurrence of the Civil Service Commission is required.

During. the year there were 10 persons in the departments of Health, Public Works, Agriculture and Conservation, and Mines and Natural Resources, who were granted educational leave for further academic training. This ·is, and will continue to be, an important contribution I feel, to the morale and the continuing and even improving efficiency of the civil service itself. Those are the main changes, Mr. Chairman, which I thought I would like to comment on in introducing the estimates of the Civil Service February lOth, 1960 Page 401

(Mr. Evans, cont'd) .... Commission. I'd be happy to answer any questions or to get informa tion that I have not covered. MR. PREFONTAINE: Mr. Chairman, I would like my first words to be ones of congrat ulation to the Honourable Minister for having assumed this important position in addition to his other department. I might say that I believe that he was the man eminently fitted to ass:ume the portfolio of Provincial Secretary and to be responsible for the Civil Service of the Province of Manitoba.

I would like to say that when I myself was in that position and he was on this side of the House I found him very fair in his criticism, but he was critical of course, and that was his duty to be, and I hope that he will find me as fair but that he might find me· critical also to a certain extent. I join with the Honourable Minister in paying tribute to the civil servants of the Province of Manitoba. I agree fully that we have possibly the best civil servants in our country -- faithful, able and devoted hard-working men and women.

This goes for the vast majority if not all of them; it goes certainly and to a greater degree for the men in the top echelons of the service -t he Deputy Ministers, Assistant Deputy Ministers. I would. like to express sorrow that the Civil Service Commission has lost the services of one of its members who had been with the Commission for a long time -- Mr. stuart Anderson. He had been in the service sillce the inception I believe of the Civil Service Commission itself, and he had worked with Mr. Newton to classify the civil servants in this province.

I am very sorry that he has left the service of the government in both capacities, or all the capacities that he had, and I believe that in this position at least he will be hard to replace. I would like to ask the Minister to appoint a very outstanding man -- a non-politi cal appointment I hope -- and I would like to suggest that he should do like the Liberal admin istration did at the time that they chose to be Chairman of the Commission, an outstanding man, a non-political, Mr. Gurney Evans at that time. Now he's the Honourable Mr. Gurney Evans.

I would like to say that the Civil Service Commission has been faced with a new proposition this year. In the old days it used to be that with respect to classification of civil servants they had to go to the Establishment Committee. The members know I am sure, what the Establishment Committee was at the time of the Liberal administration; it was a committee of Cabinet that would pass on all classification of civil servants. Now apparently, according to the report, it is a sub-committee of Treasury Board that looks after the classif ications and re-classifications.

This committee is composed of a member of the staff of the Commission, of Mr. Clare Smith, Chief Budget Analyst, Mr. Harry Taylor, Director of Organization and Methods. I doubt, Mr. Chairman, whether this is an improvement on the previous position that obtained in this province. I think it means that the Ministers themselves are farther away from the staff - not so closely in touch with appointments ..... MR. EV ANS: I think perhaps my honourable friend would welcome it if I did say this, that I'm not sure what he is referring to.

He is referring to the staff members who prepare the material, but all establishment matters or re-classification matters are dealt with by the Treasury Board, which of course, is a committee of the Ministers of the Cabinet. So I thought perhaps my honourable friend would welcome it if I just gave him that additional inform ation now. MR. PREFONTAINE: I fail to understand exactly the correction that the Honourable Minister has been making.

I am quoting from the report of the Civil Service Commission, and the report states that ''during the year a sub-committee of the Treasury Board" and I'm quoting now, "was established to assist the Commission in the review of new classifications and re classifications." This committee is composed of the persons that I have named. I think I'm entitled to take it that this committee looks after classifications .... MR.

EVANS: No, no, I might just explain then, and I hope in a helpful. spirit, that when the Commission has received the advice of the committee that you refer to, that the honourable member refers to, then the matter is passed to the Treasury Board for-decision which would then correspond with your former Establishment Committee. MR. PREFONTAINE: Well, Mr. Chairman, the Treasury Board, if I understand correctly, is composed partly of Cabinet Ministers and partly of persons like Mr. Clare Smith, Chief Budget Analyst, Mr. Harry Taylor ..... MR.

EV ANS: ........ the Treasury Board is a committee of Ministers, Cabinet Minis- ters. They are assisted by staff of course, but the staff are not members of the Treasury Board. Page 402 February lOth, 1960

MR. PREF ONTAINE: So the Treasury Board deals with every application for reclass ification. I'm very happy to learn that. It was not made clear in the report. But I would like to discuss, deal a little bit with the assistance that the Treasury Board has. We have had figures presented here to the effect that these men, including the two that I have mention ed, and there are others, cost $40, 000 to this government. I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if this addition to the staff was really necessary, especially if the Treasury Board itself is composed of the Cabinet Ministers and they deal with all these changes. I wonder.

It's something new, but I'm not one who believes, Mr. Chairman, that something is good only because it is new, or that something is necessarily good because it is new. Neither do I believe that something is bad only because it is old. I think we should study and analyze every proposition that is before intelligent persons. Now 1' m doubting whether this money that we now pay, the Government of Manitoba, to these experts is money well spent.

The figures that we were presented both in the annual report of the department of the Civil Service Commission and tabled in answer to an order for return to myself are some what misleading. The Free Press came out this morning with the statement to the effect that the increase was 19%. It is, if we take the figures as reported in the report of the Civil Service Commission between the two years 1957 to 1959 -- it shows it, 19%. But I wonder if the figures should not be all-inclusive and be presented to us, Mr. Chairman, on the same basis.

I have with me at the present time the reports for the years 1956 - 157, '58 and '59, and I see that in presenting the total number of employees the reports for the years 1956, ''57 and "58 in

Schedule "B" have this to day: The total number of civil service employees at year end (including holiday relief staff and other short term replacements) and they show for the year 1958, 4, 958. But in the report tabled the other day, yesterday it was, it doesn't give the total numbers as shown here including the relief staff and holiday relief. It shows only the total number of civil service employees at year end. So the number for 1958 on this report is 4, 417, and

whereas for the year 1958 according to the first calculation it shows a total of 4, 958, so there's a difference of about 400. It's pretty difficult for us to make comparisons when we have the figures presented on a different basis. But analyzing these reports one thing is very very plain, and it is this, that the number of civil servants is in creasing by leaps and bounds in the Province of Manitoba at the present tillll . And the number of establishments, the report shows that for the year 1959 there are 485 new positions. Some of them might not be filled, and Mr.

Chairman, I state that the positions should not be estab lished before there is a likelihood of having the position filled. They're just an encourage::11 ent to the different staffs possibly.

I have confidence in the Deputy Ministers but still in our day we did not use to create new positions without being sure that we would get the personnel and that we would really need, but the figures show that there is an increase of 485 in the year 1959, and since the new government has taken over there is an increase of 638 new positions, and the cost has increased by two and a half million dollars or just about, in just a period of 18 months. I wonder where we'll end? I know the government would say well we had to institute the 40-hour week in the institutions.

Yes, certainly, we had reduced the hours from 44 to 42 and it had taken around 125 employees. Maybe 125 should be added when they instituted the 40-hour week for the institutions, but this is a small number in comparison to the whole increase. And I say, Mr. Chairman, that we're in for a much larger increase in the coming year to put into effect the Social Allowances Act introduced by the government. The members may well remember that when we were in office we were co-operating with the municipalities to give assistance to the needy.

They were the investigators, the municipal men, the councillors ; they knew their people, they were the inYestigators. We did not call them social workers but that's what they were doing on behalf of the people of this province. Now this has been changed with respect at least to the old age pensioners. We'll have more and more cars travelling down the highways-of this province and by-ways, and this is going to cost the government, and the government will wake up some day and find that their costs are increasing very rapidly. And who is going to pay for that? There are no free government services, Mr. Chairman.

These services must be paid for by someone. We used to have a policy to just give the services that we thought were necessary to the people of this province, because we knew that every time that we took the money from the people in order to give the money back in services, we had to hire civil servants to collect that money February loth, 1960 Page 403

(Mr. Prefontaine, cont' d) •... and civil servants again to distribute that money back. (Hear, hear!) And we knew that every time we collected a dollar we were able to hand back only 7 5 cents. And our services were at par with services in other provinces. Mr. Chairman, I'm alarmed at the growth of the civil service in this province. I'm really alarmed.

It's right to give certain services, but the increases should be checked very very closely by the government, and I object to the famous increase, and the large increase that will take place in the Department of Health and Public Welfare to put into practice the new policy adopted by that department. Some people will say that we left the situation in a mess. It has been stated before, but we did not leave it in a mess with respect to the civil service. We handed over to this government the best civil service,- possibly as I said before, and as the Honourable Minister has stated, in the Dominion of Canada.

We have established joint meetings that the Honourable Minister has mentioned. We legalized and we put our civil servants in a top position of all civil service associations in the Dominion of Canada. We instituted the five- day week for the office staff - 37-1/2 hours a week. We reclassified the positions by i.lJ.creasing the annual increments. We had a happy and satisfied civil service. We handed it over to the government. Certainly there are -- the government has made cer tain changes -- changes are being made all the time.

Nothing remains static, and I'm sure when this government is defeated in four years from now there'll be changes to be made yet, because as always, can't stay quiet, can't stay still, just like a boat in fast- moving river - you can't keep it still, it will either go down stream or up stream; if your oars are good and you've got a good body you can go up stream, but otherwise it will go down stream. You can't stay still. And I say, Mr. Chairman, that this is possibly the luckiest government that ever took office if we think of the civil service that we handed it when we left the reins of government.

I don't know if I have very much more to add. I see in the report of the Civil Service Commission that the group life insurance will come into being some time. Well, this is one of the things that we had approved -the principle had been approved and we had had tenders by four or five insurance companies. We were ready to put it into effect. You might say "Why didn't you put it in?" It was one of the later requests that the Employees" Association made to us before we left office, and we were working on it and we would have had it if we had remained in office. I say it's not in effect yet .

I hope that the government will establish group insurance for the civil service as soon as possible because it is very important. The Honourable the First Minister has told us that they are instituting what's been called a program of educational-leave designed to give advanced training, particularly in technical fields, to staff members. I think I agree with this program. I think that certain positions in certain departments are highly technical, that it is quite impossible to find men in this pro vince who have been trained specifically for that particular job that they must do.

Might be proper to give them a cha_llce to complete their training and be better civil servants, but this again should not be overdone. It should be watched very carefully because the taxpayers will have to shoulder the load. Now, Mr. Chairman, this is about all I have to say, and again I would like to say that --pay my compliments to the Civil Service Commission and express the hope that the replacement to be made will be a man who will continue the tradition of the Civil Service Commission in this province. (Hear, hear!). MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Chairman, I'm glad to take

part in consideration of our Civil Service Commission. I join with both the Minister and some of the remarks of the Honourable the Member for Carillon, and those remarks in general are praise for our Civil Service here in the Province of Manitoba.

I have not had very much contact intimately with the civil ser vants in other jurisdictions, but I can say without equivocation that insofar as the general run of our civil servants here in the Province of Manitoba, almost without exception, that in any dealings that I have had with them I have found them most courteous, most obliging and ready on most occasions to even go beyond the call of duty to consider problems which we may have as individuals, and I think it is indeed a tribute to the Province of Manitoba that we have such a high calibre 0f persons within our Civil Service and also on the Civil Service -Commission itself.

Now having said that, I must disagree with 95% of the remarks of the honourable member wno has just taken his seat. I appreciate and realize that it was through my actions, along with 56 other members of this Legislature, that there has been a considerable increase in our Page 404 February lOth, 1960

(Mr. Paulley, cont'd) •..•• civil service. We voted unanimously, if I recall correctly, for the institution of the new Social Allowances Act in the Province of Manitoba, cur Farm Credit Act, our changes in our Schools Act, the establishment of an Industrial Development Fund Act, and I think, :Mr. Chairman, it is improper for any one of us in this House, and I believe we all did, to criticize the government because of the results of our actions there has been increases in our civil service.

It of necessity follows that if these programs were going to be instituted either by Conservative government, a Liberal government or a CCF government, the natural consequence would be an increase within our civil service. It seems to me, and I love the honourable gentleman who has just taken his seat, that his criticism was not justi fied, at least to the full intent of his remarks. We appreciate very much the endeavours that the honourable gentleman made at the time he headed the department in connection with the Civil Service Commission.

And I would say that he did what he thought was right, but since that time there has been a change of thinking, and there was even a change of thinking within his own party, that their policies did not go far enough in respect of the advancement of the Province of Manitoba. The result of that, the obvious we have with us, they're sitting over here instead of other there.

And in saying that please not let it be understood that I'm attempt ing to butter the government, because it is well known in this Hous e if there is any buttering to be done as far as the government is concerned, I'll qualify it with a good portion of marg arine . But I do think that we of the House and not of any particular party, if there is any criticism to the government because of the increase in staff of the civil service should take our fair share of the blame, because it was mainly because of the adoption of policies which we all agreed with, that this has resulted.

Now I'm not going to speak long, I have said what I think of the civil servants. I think that I've only been fair in my remarks apropos of the increase. We may have some criticisms to offer of what appears to be a policy, although I don't think it's reflected in the number of civil servants, but the policy of the present government of setting up little boards and com missions all across the face of the Province of Manitoba to handle little details in jurisdic tions,

whereas before they were handled in a different manner. It seems to me that on read ing news reports and news releases of the government itself that they may have gone over board in setting up little boards and commissions dealing with various facets of government or dealing with the people throughout the province. I think possibly I'll have something further to say on that at a later date. However there is one thing that strikes me and I would like an answer from the Honourable the Provincial Treasurer. That on reading the report of the Commission, -- and I must confess Mr.

Chairman that I haven't had or haven't taken the opportunity of studying it thoroughly as is well understood due to other business before the House -- but the re seems to me to be a very significant point in considering the report of the Commi ssion and taking note of the return which was requested for the Honourable Member of Carillon. The report or order for return for the Honourable Member for Carillon informs us that as of December 31st, 1959 there were 4, 758 members on the established and provisional payrolls of civil servants. And-I take that to be authentic. And then in

Schedule "A" of the Commission•s- report,- - no,

schedule "A", Mr. Minister, of their report that I have before me -- we note that there has been by way of resignation, permanent and provisional employees, the sum of 765. If my mathematics are correct this represents 16% of the total number that were on staff as of December 31st, 1959. It appears to me, Mr. Chairman, that 16% of resignations in any industry within a year is too high. There must be reasons for it and I would like to know those reasons.

I appreciate the fact that in the recent two or three years there has been adjustments in salaries of our civil servants; I appreciate the fact that over the past four or five years there has been a gradual reduction in the weekly -- hourly work week. We have heard from the Honourable the Provincial Treasurer a rather glowing report of the esprit de corps within the Civil Service Commission and the civil service . . (Interjection) Provincial Secretary, I'm sorry. I'm sure you'd say the same thing. Yes. And I agree with it in general. But looking on the basis of the figures themselves, Mr.

Chairman, it appears to me that a 16% resignation in the period of a year is too high a percentage and thare must be basic reasons for it, and I would like to hear from the Provincial Treasurer an explanation. It may be that by ----excuse me, Provincial Secretary--it may be -(Interjection) -- O.K. It may be Mr. Chairman that this is an unusual ---I'm sorry that I didn't have the figures February 10th,,1960 Page 405

(Mr. Paulley, cont'd) •.••. with me for past years but I've just computed this on the basis of these two reports. So I would like an explanation if there is one from the Provincial Secret ary. Now .then I would like to commend the Provincial Secretary or the Civil Service Com missi on, or whoever is responsible for their endeavours on an educational basis within the civil service itself. It is an idea that has been tried in industry generally. I might say Mr.

Chairman, that in our railroads we have conducted courses of this nature and it has been of great benefit, and those employees who are interested in advancement and others who may not eventually be advanced within the staff itself have found a great deal of aid in these courses, and I would compliment this new endeavour.

As far as the, I was going to mention the group life insurance on its proper item, but seeing as my Honourable Friend from Carill on has mentioned it I note that it is progressing and I would like possibly if the Minister would like to handle it now, if he could give us an indi cation about the probable start of the scheme and if he could indicate to us what response has been made by the civil service in connection with the plan. Now having said those few remarks Mr. Chairman, I'll not go any further.

Again I want to emphasize, and I'm.sure I'm speaking for all of my group, when I say I have a great admiration for the civil servants of the Province of Manitoba. They are doing a very good job. . ............ Continued on next page. Page 406 February lOth, 1960

MR," R. G. SMELLIE (Birtle-Russell): .Mr. Chairman , I would like to be brief but there have been some remarks made during the course of this debate that I can hardly let pass without making some brief reference to them . The Honourable Member for Car illon mentioned that the previous administration had instituted in this province only such services as they considered absolutely necessary, bearing in mind that the costs of all such services must be borne by the people of the Province of Manitoba.

And I think that is a fact of which we are all cognizant and I don't think he intended to suggest that the government or those of us wh o sit on this side, think that we can pay for the cost of such services in any other way than as a charge to the people of Manitoba. And he did suggest that the Civil Service which was taken over by this administration when we took over the Government of Manitoba was a good one, and I must agree with him and with other previous speakers here that the Civil Service of Manitoba was and is a good civil service. But I would like,to suggest, Mr.

Chairman, that the Civil Service was good not be cause of the policy of the previous administration but in spite of it. --(interjection)--How long have you been here?--( Interjection)--That could be Mister--(interjection)--I think, perhaps, Mr. Chairman, that this criticism has fallen somewhat flat in view of the fact that the people of Manitoba who must pay for the services have indicated in the elections of the past three years that they desired aQ.ditional services and that they were willing to pay for them, and I would sug gest, Mr.

Chairman, that if my honourable friends, the Liberals with the capital "L", had been a little more liberal with some of the services that the people of this province desire and still wish, they might still be the government of this province. MR. M. N> HRYHORCZUK, Q. C. (Ethelbert Plains): Mr. Chairman, I listened with con siderable interest to the Honourable the Leader of the CCF Party, especially when he made the statement that insofar as the increase in the number of civil servants is concerned the Oppositi on is as much to blame as the government.

And he cited the crop insurance, the industrial de velopment, the social assistance, and so forth. He made the statement, Mr. Chairman, that we supported those particular pieces of legislation and therefore we should take our share of the blame if there is any.

I would like to remind the Honourable the Leader of the CCF Party that those additional civil servants were almost entirely provided for in the current year's es timates, not in the estimates under consideration, and if the Honourable the Leader of the CCF Party had done his homework, he would have found out that the increase i.n salaries in this year's estimates, in the estimates we are now considering, make room for several hundred a::':. ditional civil servants. --(Interjection)--All right, then here's how we arrived ati.t, Mr. Chairman. MR. ROBLIN: Go ahead and prove it. MR. HRYHORCZUK: I will.

The increase i.n this year1s estimatesam ountsto $10 million seven and I'm only giving the round figures. Now there are certain appropriations made by the government that require additional civil servants and there are other expenditures that do not. Now let us see what this $10 million seven--wher_e the increase comes, and we'll find that edu cational grants are increased by $6 million six. Now how many additional civil servants do we need to pay out those grants? There will be some bookkeeping but the number of civil ser vants isn't going to be large.

We see that the public debt charges are increased by $2 million seven. Is that going to call for an increase in the number of civil servants? If it does, it will only be very few in number, I hope. Then if we add up all the increases in salaries throughout those estimates, you will find that the total salary increases are $2 million three. Six hundred thousand of this has been accounted for by the Honourable the First Minister yesterday, when he stated that six hundred thousand can be attributed to the annual increment increases in sal aries. That leaves a million seven, and I say to you, Mr.

Chairman, that civil servants at $4, 000 a piece--that means over 400 additional civil servants--if that's what this money is go ing to be used for. We have had no explanation of the increases. It's too bad that the govern ment didn't see fit to put the numbers of civil servants where they should have been--in each of the departments--and we wouldn't have to do so much work to find out just what i.s being done. We're 110t opposed to increases in salaries to those civil servants that earn them. Nobody's ever heard us say that.

But we are opposed to increases in the number of civil servants with out additional public service by the government. And if you add up these figures, you'll find that the educational grants, the public debt charges and the salary increases amount to $11 mil lion six, almost a million dollars more than the total of the budget--are the increase in this year's estimates. In other words, you can only draw one conclusion, that somewhere the February lOth, 1960 Page 407

(Mr. Hryhorczuk, cont'd. ) .. services given by this government have been reduced, and if that is true, then why ask for an additional million seven for salary increases or fvr additional employees ? And that is what we are criticizing the government for, and I think we are right in doing so. After all is said and done, the taxpayer of this province has to pay for those civil servants, and unless he receives some service for that tax dollar, he'll be wondering why the sala ry increases have provided for approximately additional 400 civil servants without an in crease in public service. MR. L. DESJARDINS (St.

Boniface) : The member for Birtle-Russell told us that the people of Manitoba made their choice the last election and said that they wanted more increase, more service, and so on. I think that we have to admit that he's probably right in this respect, but then when he says that they are willing to pay for it, I don't think that's right. They were definitely told that all that would not cost any more money at all. They were all getting that for nothing -- (Interjection) -- Oh yes, they were-- MR. ROBLIN: No. MR. DESJARDINS: Oh yes, look at your election cam paign and so on. You'll see.

Now we will certainly go along with everybody in this House and congratulate'-all the civil servants . But we will not go as far as the CCF and tell the government that they "go ahead, have a lot of them. Have these civil servants, you're doing a good job. " But on the same breath, "you're going overboard. You're having too many of them" No, we always said that we felt you had too many of them, for the service they were rendering, and we still say it. And because the people of Manitoba will soon find out who 's right.

Now yesterday -- this all in the C i,.vil Service - yesterday the Minister informed this House that the total number of vehicles covered by the fleet policy was 1200. If we look at the June 26th, '57 copy of Hansard, on page 351, we find that when asked the same question the answer th en was 1024. And I could quote, "Mr. Roblin: The fleet totals 1024 units, and that is the number of vehicles that are cover�d by this , I see. I have this information here.

" Now if both these answers were answered correctly -- and we have no reason to believe that they weren't -- and if these cars were not transferred -- this does not include this year -- transferred from another department -- another source and if this was done I'm sura that we would be told -- then we have reason to believe that there has been an increase of 176 cars in a short period of six months. Now unless these cars are given to the province, I think that this is strictly exhorbitant. And that means that you 111 probably have somebody to drive those cars and so on.

I think that we certaiilly have too large an inc_rease of civil ser vants , and that does not include only their sa laries but the cars, the insurance, superannuati on, pension and so on. Well, I think the same thing is in everything. Everything is going up. And I feel that this is also--s peaking about the salary of these civil servants , because that's what it is--! think that it is high time that the government should go back to this PG type of li cences. I think that the people of Manitoba are entitled--have every right to know what cars are ·;;t.eirs, and where those cars are going--what they are doing.

I think that this is only right. There is no reason why this shouldn't be done. Another government come in with a great scheme. It was going b charge--no, it was fair. Everybody would understand. They were going to charge the civil servants for their cars. They were going to enrich the treasury by $5 0, 000 by charging $20, $12 and even $10, to everyone that had this car. Previous- -that 's the amount, yes--p reviously, these same people were allowed 200 miles. Now there is no li mit. Previously, many of those people had private cars. But now they are encouraged to do away with those private cars.

Why should they? For $10 a month, boy, you're crazy if you buy a car. Now is that going to be $50, 000 more in the treasury? I don't think so. If you start figuring out how much it's going to cost for gas; for oil; for insurance; wear and tear of these cars --! don't. think you will have too much left of this $50, 000. Now I say to you, do you think that any business here- -any private business --could go along these lines very long?

Any compa ny that would try anything like that to encourage people to have all kinds of people work ing for them; not knowing where they are; not knowing what they are doing; let them have any cars ; pay the shot for $10 a montb--I think that they would be bankrupt in no time. And this- the Liberal has been telling you this . The members of this party have been telling you this all along, and they are still telling the people of Manitoba- -and I think they: are waking up now- that the government of Diefenbaker, as well as the government of this province, is leading us exactly to bankruptcy ..

Page 408 February lOth, 1960

MR. ROB LIN: Mr. Speaker, I rather enjoy these little challenges that my honourable friends opposite put up from time to time in connection with matters of this sort, because they do go chasing after so many wild hares. They do manage to get themselves so mixed up with inaccuracies that it makes it rather simple sometimes to straighten them out on some of the wild and extravagant statements that are made. I want to start out by saying one thing.

If any one imagines that this governmEnt intends to operate the services of the province on the same staff, either with cars or personnel, that our predecessors operated on, then they are mistak en. We never gave any undertaking that we could bring in these extra services, which we have brought in in the Province of Manitoba, on the same staff.

It was always, I think, a matter ob vious to anyone who cared to consider the situation, that if these new services were introduced --and obviously it would take men and women and money to operate them, --and I think that members opposite who considered the policies of the government must have come to those con clusions when the items were before us for discussion from time to time. And I am sure they did.

I am sure that if anyone thinks back, and they remember the discussions that took place in this House with respect to the policy of--the new policy in social allowances which we intro duced, I think it must have been obvious that it .couldn't be done without the hiring of more people. I think the Minister of Health, when he spoke about this subject, explained that he couldn't bring it in right away, because of the necessity of hiring quite a large number of staff.

When the hospital service plan came in--we've hired a number of p9ople since we came in to cope with that plan--it was obvious it would need more people to operate them. It was obvio.us that it would need more cars in order to. run it. Then yo.u can go. do.wn thro.ugh the increases in the people in the Extensio.n Departn:e nt in the Department o.f Agriculture. We attempted to improve and expand the extension services to the people o.f this province. And it was o.bvious that mo.re people would be required, and mo.re vehicles wo.uld be necessary if these services are to. be given ..

Now I could weary the House--and I do.n't think it necessary--by going thro.ugh the vario.us departments o.f the administration, and pointing out just exactly where these in creases have ocurred, and why they have occurred. If anyone has taken the trouble, and ob viously very few have, to read through the report of the Civil Service Commission, you will find there a statement of the increases in government staff in the year 1949. Now remember, Mr. Speaker--Mr.

Chairman, that that i.s the year of the big bulge so to speak, because it was not until August 4th, of 1949 that we received the approval of this House--of this legislature to-(in terjection)--'59, I'm sorry--to hire additional staff i.n most of the departments that are under consideration. And provision was made to pay for these people. And if you want to know where they are, or who they are, just look at page eight of the Civil Service Commission Re port. It's all outlined there.

And let me say that if I should read this to you, under Depart ment of the Attorney-General, it says practically all the increases in the Department of the Attorney-General results from establishing positions formerly provisional. And what were they? Well included among them was the probation service. This House voted for the probati on service. I don •t recall a single member of this House saying we shouldn't have an improved pro bation service. Howdoyou supposeyouget that probation service ? By magic ? Or by doubling the work load on the people there? It can't be done. It can't be done efficiently.

You have to hire men. And if you hire and extend the probation service outside the City of Winnipeg as we have done in Dauphin, Portage la Prairie., Brandon, other places, you need automobiles and you need office equipment in order for that to be done. The Department of Agriculture and Conservation--how many increases there? 127. Wrong you say. I don't know. Maybe it is. But I do know that no one in this House objected, in the main, to any of the services that we said that we were going to provide in the Department of Agriculture.

I didn't hear anyone say it was wrong to set up a new office in Dauphin, or one in Brandon. I didn •t hear anyone say that it was wrong to increase the number of men on the staff there. I didn't hear anyone say that we shouldn't expand our water conservation and drainage and control. On the contrary, I heard everyone say that was good. But how did they expect that was to be performed? By slight of hand? No, Sir. By the hiring of staff; by the payment of wages; by the expansion of the number of people in the service of the people of Manitoba. That's what we did.

And you can go on into Comptroller-General, (1) , one extra auditor. I suppose I needn't comment on that. In Education, 44, increasing in the staff of that department to expand the services that are being so largely augmented in this recent year. Labo'll", 17 people. What do they say February lOth, 1960 Page 409

(Mr. Roblin, cont'd. ) .. about that? Mostly to increase the safety and inspection staffs. In dustry and Commerce is growing in this province, and we're very happy about it, but it brings certain direct costs to the administration. What are those costs ? The· costs of inspection; the costs of providing safety; the cost of taking care, for example, of the situation respecting natural gas which oreated quite a little furor because of some conflict in inspection principles that .were being followed. That had to be corrected. We have to provide that kind of service. Does any member here suggest we should not?

If we do provide it, then we have to provide the money and the personnel to do it. You can carry on through this list in the Department of Health and Welfare. We increas ed 18 in the health division because we'v e increased many of our services. In the pyschiatric division, 11 have been increased. We are under pressure from people on the other side to im prove our pyschiatric services and we're trying to do so. And how do you do it? You do it by getting more people working on the job. You try and decide what you can afford to pay for and what should be done and you put it in.

And in the welfare division--in the welfare division there's an increase of 94 and that's a lot of people, and they'll be running around the province doing what my honourable friend from Carillon says they shouldn't do. But what they will be doing, Sir, is they will be trying to fit need to the individual case, and I'm willing to stake whatever reputation I have, or whatever standing I may have, or my position in this House for that matter, on the fact that it is better to do that and to try and meet need on an individual ba sis on a way that is going to meet with the approval of our people than on any other.

My hon ourable friend from Carillon will say, "no, we did it fine our way; we let the municipal people do it. " Well, Sir, we took that particular issue to the public and they told us to get on with it this way, and that's why we're doing it. And I remember too, that my honourable friend the member for Carillon did not vote against our measure when we had it in the House here. If I'm wrong, may he correct me. I don't think a single member on the opposite side voted against the principle of that measure when it was in the House.

They had objections to it, of course, but they accepted the principle, and when you do that I think you have to accept the consequence of that principle; namely , that you hire 94 people and you get a few automobiles so that they can do the job. And you can go through the rest of these figures here, Sir--I don't think I should weary the House with it, but you can go through it and you can find out exactly where these extra people are and what they're trying to do.

And if my honourable friend, the member for Ethelbert, tries to leave the impression that this year we are increasing our staff by some 400 people and providing services--less services or the sam e services with more people, and give the impression that we'r e not doing such an efficient job or that kind of thing, I think he's mistaken, because the people that are being provided for here are the people who are required on our staff and are to carry out the policies which were largely implemented at the last session of our legislature. That's what these people are here for and that's the job that they're doing.

It's completely erroneous and mistaken to say that there is suddenly some new increase in the Civil Service to take care of other policies or to do these policies in a more leisurely way or in a way not as efficient as has been done before. That is simply not the case. We are, in this budget, making provision for the "fruition" ,. if I can use that expres sion, of the policies that were decided upon only some six or seven months ago, Sir. Don't forget that. It's only some six or seven mon1hs since we last met and last passed a budget for this House .

I don't know whether there are any other points that strike me of great importance. I think perhaps I should say a word about what the Honourable Member for st. Boniface had to say because he 's, I think, a little wide of the mark there. I think that he misunderstands the system that is followed in the allocation of government cars. People aren't allocated a car on the part of the government just for fun. No one gets a car because they're willing to pay the $20 a month charge that is made; it doesn't work that way at all.

I think some of his- -he can be informed by some of his friends that in the first place, if a man is using a private car, he has to perform a certain number of miles on public service before there's any suggestion that he should be given a government car, but after a certain mileage, well then that takes over. Now, I would like to say that there's been no change as far as I'm aware; no change in the pro cedure that's followed in connection with allocation of government cars.

It goes through exact ly the same course as it did when my honourable friends were in office, and I think they had a Page 410 February lOth, 1960

(Mr. Roblin, cont'd. ) • • pretty satisfactory ·way of determining who should get a car and who should not. The question is, what happens to the car --what happens to this question of private use . Well, we found out that in the course of things practically no one, very few people indeed, were submitted any returns to the government that they were using a government car for pri vate purposes to such an extent that it would require a special payment by them.

Now we en quired into that and we had it explained to us by those who had been familiar with the process that no very great attention was paid to that in days gone by for the reason that the use of this car was considered as a per quittance, that salaries were somewhat lower than the average had been and that this was a sort of "perk" that the civil servant could enjoy and in partial com pensation for the salary situation. Now, we thought it best to pay a reasonable· salary, which we have done.

My honourable member from Ethelbert mustn•t forget that we increased our ap propriation for salaries by over $90 0, 000 si.x months ago when we met. I hope he's taken that fact into accou nt--(interjection)--very good. Well, the position is that salaries now being at a satisfactory level, it was deemed advi sable that we should make this charge so that members of the Civil Service could, with a good conscienc e, be using a government car for minor per sonal use as they do now, without feeling that they were imposi ng in any way upon the taxpayer; that they were paying their full way.

And I must say that when that policy was suggested, I ra ther wondered whether the Civil Service would think it was an impo sition or whether theythought it was not unreasonable. And I'm glad to say that on the information we received, although there were certainly some that perhaps grumbled a little, but on the whole it was considered to be the fair and right thing to do. And if there is any member of the Civil Service driving a government car who is willing to say to us , "I do not use this for my private purposes, " then we say that you don't have to pay the $20.

All they have to do is make that statement to us in good faith; that they're not using it; and they don't have to pay the sum; it's dealt with on that basis. Very few do. The vast maj ority are willing to make that extra payment and have the opportunity to use the car as they were already doing anyway for their private use. And I say that that policy, I believe, is prudent and is not leading to any abuse or any difficulties of the sort envisioned by my honourable friend. So what I come back to is this, I don't really object to members on the other side telling us that we pay too much to the civil servants.

I don't really object-- MR. PAULLEY: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, but I for one did not say that';· MR. ROBLIN: Well, I'm really not talking about you at the moment. MR. HRYHORCZUK: Well, I hope that you're not talking about me, because I made it quite plain that I wasn't opposed to any salary increases. MR. ROBLIN: Now that we have such universal agreement, I would like to continue with what I have to say, and that is , that I don't object to the critici sm--let's put it that way--I don't object to the critic ism ; I don 't object to members of the opposi tion keeping a close eye on the growth of the Civil Service.

That's the right thing to do. We.try to do it ourselves; we do. the best we can with it and we think we're reasonably successful; and in marginal cases where there may be an unjustified growth going on, it's a good thing that it should be brought to the attenti on of the com mittee. And we make n:o com plaint about that, but we do think that it is not logi cal and we do think that it should not be the case as it is today , when m embers who are on re cord as having approved of a policy, having voted for the cause, then object to the result. Now that's unreasonable.

Members op posite voted for the cause of the inc rease in the Civil Ser vice in the Province of Manit oba. I can't recall--there may be instances but I can't recall any im portant matters affecting this particular discussion where they didn 't vote for the cause and now they want to comp lain about the effect. Well you can't do that in logic or in fairness, it seems to me. You keep on looking at the Civil Service; there's no objection to that.

Youlet us know what you think about it and if you think that we're extravagant at any particular point, then of course there's no reason at all why you can't bring that matter to our notic e. But I think that in dealing these sledgehammer blows --and that's what they are-de aling these sledge hammer blows, this undi scriminating criticism of 400 extra people and $2 million or whatever the facts used across the way , I say that under the circumstanc es under which this House meets , that criticism is not justified because those arose from the cause that we all agreed to endorse; they're the effect of that ca use.

We recognized it--if we had any sense we recognized it at the time, and now that it is with us and we have to fac e the matter that it involves, I don •t think February lOth, 1960 Page 41 1

(Mr. Roblin, cont'd. ) .. that we can go back and complain because we object to the cause when we supported it in the first instance. So while I say that we make no objections to criticism, we do think that this sledgehammer, undiscriminating type of attack is something which really cannot be supported by thoughtful people . MR. HRYHO RCZUK: Mr. Chairman, I admire the ability and the manner in which the Honourable the First Minister can get himself out from under a difficult situation, but might I point out to him some additional figures that I think need explaining?

When we look at our main supply estimates for 1959 we find that there were approximately $81 million; in 1960, $84 mil lion six; in 1961, there are $95 million three. The difference between 1959 and 196 1 is $14 mil lion: three. Now let's take a look at the salaries. In 1959 there were $13 million three; in 1960, $16 million five; in 1961, $18 million_ eight; or a difference of $5 million five between 1959 and 1961. Or to put it another way, the total increase in the main supp!y estimates from 1959 to 1961 show that approximately 40% of those increases were in the way of salaries. Mr.

Chair man, we expect--the people of this province expect to get value for their money and they cer tainly don't get it when you don't give them any more public services, except tu the two and the four to six. MR. ROB LIN: I'm not going to repeat my speech. MR. ORLIKOW: Mr. Chairman, it's not my intention to come to the defence of the gov ernment, but at the same time it seems to me that in what the member for St. Boniface said, there is a complete contradiction. The member for St. Boniface is critical of the increase in the number of civil servants.

I would not only agree with those who suggest that if the member for St. Boniface and indeed all the members of the official opposition are opposed to an increase in the number of civil servants, that they could have effected that or could have shown that they really meant that by voting against the various proposals for increases in services which have been put in this House and which have been voted upon. Not only have they not voted against these, but in fact they, and we too, and I accept my responsibility, have on many occasions sug gested further improvements and further increases.

I can remember last year suggesting to the Honourable the Attorney-General that we needed more probation officers; I can remember suggesting to the Minister of Health that we needed to increase the number of people working in the mental institutions. Now I would be ridiculous, Mr. Chairman, if I then suggested that we could hold the line in the nnmber of civil servants. I can remember the Honourable Mem ber for St. Boniface making an excellent speech, an impassioned plea, for-'-! haven't got the page number but I'm sure I can find tt--for a youth authority to do something about juvenile de linquency.

I wonder who we thought would do that work--whether he thought that could be done with no increase in the staff? Obviously, if we 're going to have an increase in the services , we 've got to have an increase in staff, and the members of the opposition who oppose it should have voted against these improvements in services. But, Mr. Chairman, as !listen to them speak I was reminded of one service, probably the last service which the former government inaugurated, the Manitoba Hospital Services Plan.

Now I haven't got the latest reports, but I have before me the report for the year ending Dec ember 31 st, 1958, and if members will get it out and turn to page 13 they will see that as of December 31 st, 195 8, · there were working for the Manitoba Hospital Services Plan, 197 em ployees. I'm not complaining about it and probably it's more now. If you're going to have a hospital services plan, which they when they were in office inaugurated, it's going to take people to administer the plan. So all I'm saying, Mr. Chairman, is that the members of the oppositi on ought to be reasonable.

They can't have their cake and eat it; they can't on the one hand vote for improvements in services and new services, and on the other hand complain that the number of civil servants is going up. If there are instances where civil servants are not doing their job; where they're not required; then I think it's the job of the opposition or of any mem ber to illustrate them and to tell the government where too many people are working. · But these blunderbuss charges, Mr. Chairman, as far as I'm concerned are made only for political pur poses. There is no rhyme or reason to them. MR.

DESJARDINS: We know, just as well as any member of the CCF, that to accom plish something you need more personnel. We 're only talking about the exorbitant increase in si.x months, 176 cars. That's what we'd like to know--why? Yes, last year I spoke of do ing something for the juveniles; of trying to rectify a lot of things but that wasn't done at all. Page 412 February lOth, 1960

(Mr. Desja rdins, cont' d. ) •• I can bring and show you a bunch of books that I can get in any bookstore here which I call obscene literature. Nothing was done about that so, therefore, let's not talk about increased personnel to do that work because that isn't done. Now the Honourable the First Minister I don't think is too logical. ·He wants to encourage criticism but not on this major problem. All right--this major scheme or new things that dif ferent departm ents wi.ll bring about, but I think that we can very well gi.ve him a lot of criti cism on other things.

Now first of all he tells us that under the old system the civil employ eeswer,e'nt paid well enough and the cars were in a way to recompense them--to help them. In other words, it was part of their salary. Now he tells us that, "no, that's fine. They are getting fai.r wages--full wages now and then we will gi.ve them a car or a panel truck for $120 a year". And he says there's no abuse in that at all. Well, how does he know? And if there's no abuse, I'd like to ask this question--I'd like to have an answer to this question. Why did the government discontinue this PG license plates ? Why?

If you have no reason--if you •re not afraid--if you think it is fair to have those cars at all the beaches and all the summer resorts and so on, tell us why you object to having this PG lice use ? Now number two--if you •re so proud of the fact that you •re hiring all these new civil servants, can you tell us why we can't get some way of knowing without having to resort to all kinds of figuring and so on--can you tell us why the number of people involved when you mentioned salaries--why that isn't there? I mean, you must know how many people you have. I hope you do that anyway .

So I'd like to have an answer to these two questions. I don't think that that has anything to do with any of your major contribution and so on. MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Chairman, the only question that I intend to answer at the present time has to do with the information about the Civil Service. It's entirely--it's all in this re port. If you want to find out how many .people we're employing, it's all here. If you wish, too, we'd be glad to furuish any information on any item as we're doing to the Ho use. MR. DESJ ARDINS: That's not what I'm talking about.

Do you care to give us an answer to that or do you refuse, Mr. -- MR. ROBLIN: That's a dead issue as far as I'm concerned. MR. DESJARDINS: All right, well that's what I thought. What about giving us the num ber of employees then whose salaries we're discussing? Is that a dead is sue too ? MR. ROBLIN: No, it was given to you. MR. J. P. TANCHAK (Emerson) : I'd like to--I didn't intend to enter into this debate but some of those speeches prompted me to enter.

I, too , wish to congratulate the Civil Service on the good work that they have been doing and we are glad to hear the good people oppo site tell , us that they inherited a very good Civil Service. I quite agree with them, but I do not think that we on this side are objecting to an increase in civil servants, but we are objecting to the tremendous and indi scriminate increase in the Civil Service. We hear quite a lot--we are be ing blamed. They say you voted for some new legislation and then you complain that we have to hire new civil servants.

We voted for that and naturally we knew that it will im ply an in crease in civil servants , but at the same ti.me, the people of Manitoba were promised that all this new legislation, all these new services, they would get without any extra taxation. That's the main reason that we voted for that too. We believed that the Honourable the First Minister and the Cabinet Ministers were really and truly going to give us services without any extra taxation, but we find now that the people of Manitoba are being taxed. They were taxed last year.

There was an extra tax; there were hidden taxes; the fees-which they preferred to call "fees" --we still insist they are taxes; the beer taxes and so on. Therefore, we can not go along ;vith this and I think it is our duty to question the Cabinet Mini sters and the First Minis ter on their expenditure, because in one year our expenditure, especially our debts and ex penditure has inc reased by 12 1/2%. Now that's something to worry about. Now when we come back to the PG licenses, I a:m too wondering why this change was made.

The citizens of Manitoba want to know and they're entitled to know, where these cars are and how ma ny they own, and so on. Why make this change ? I see absolutely no reason for making that change. The only thing that I can infer from that is that the government is try ing to hide something from the people. I see no other reason whatsoever. We are tOld that since June--last June, the increase was 176 cars. I'd say maybe 50 would have been enough, but there was 176. We're not being told just exactly why that increase--sure, extra services February lOth, 1960 Page 413

(Mr. Tanchak, cont'd. ) •. and so on, but still I believe that the government is trying to hide som ething. What is that something? It seems to me that we can compare them to schoolboys who have dipped their hands into the kitchen cookie jar and they're just afraid to come out and tell the people. I thank you. MR . CAMPBELL: Mr. Chairman, I have not been taking very much of the time of the commi ttee this afternoon and, as so many of the members say, perhaps I would not have enter ed the debate at all had it not been for the spirited remarks of my honourable friend the First Minister.

I join with my colle ague from Ethelbert Plains in paying tribute to his ability to make a pretty effective defence of an awkward position that he finds himself in. I think his spirited defence was just a case of him having been pretty embarrassed by finding that his chickens are now comi ng home to roost, and they're roosting around pretty thick. My honour able friend has--a lot of chickens have arrived already and there are more of them will be flock ing in day after day.

I don't wonder my hor--:.rrable friend is worried over the situation, and therefore he gets up and he follows the time-honoured method that the best defence is to attack and so he attacks we fellows , with good support from his adjunctive party over here at the side --he attacks us by saying , "yes, but you folks voted for this. You voted for all this". I know how my honourable friend the Leader of the CCF Party dislikes my explanation of that. I know that he thinks it's a terrible thing for me to say that the public deserves what they get.

He thinks that's awful; but I say that the only--(interjection )--no, I don't--I think the only way that the public learns is the same way that we ourselves learn, and that's largely by trial and error. We don't usually, either individually or the public, learn very much by the figuring of things out in advance. The real system is trial and error. Now, why did we vote for these things that my honourable friends talk about? Because they went up :1nd down the length and breadth of this province promising that they could do them without increase of taxation--(interjection)- That is true!

They're on record time and time again. We tried--my honourable friend says that's a poor reason. It was a poor argument for my friend to use in the first place. But we tried to put up the other side of the case, ineffectively perhaps, and I admit we didn't do as good a job as we should have done. But on many points we were assailed--we weren't doing enough for the farmers. My honourable friend who sits in the seat of the First Minister today has been for years, while he was in opposition, a great friend of the farmer--a great defender of the farmers' position while he was sitting on this side of the House.

It's pretty different now. He's not so sure of those things now. Crop insurance--you bet we'll have crop insurance. But when he gets in, what? We'll have some test areas ; we'll study it a little bit more. Farm credit--the real pro blem, not the only one, but the real problem facing the farmers of Manitoba was the credit situ ation. We were going to fix it.

The farm loans, the Canadian Farm Loans, when we said that their efforts shouldn't be duplicated by putting another organization in to do the same thing that they were already equipped to do, my honourable friend said, "Ah, ha, but they're lo aning only on the strictest business principles. They are too tough with the farmers. We want a farm credit plan--a provincial farm credit plan that will give ", he didn't use these exact words, but his definite implication was, "we'll give on the basis of need. " MR. ROBLIN: I'm not going to argue over it. MR . CAMPBELL: Yes, Sir. It was and I can produce the evidence- MR.

ROBLIN: Well, go ahead and produce it. MR. CAMPBELL: I'll produce it--I'll produce it for my honourable friend. He said the reason that the Canadian Farm Loans which is already in operation with a good record of ex perience behind them can't do this job because they insist on having a busine ss -like proposition all the time and we--we need in the Province of Manitoba a provincial agency that will give to the farmer that hasn't got that same kind of asset. But what does he say and what do his sup porters say now that they're in office ?

They say, "oh, ho, but this must be run as a busin ess like operation." Anybody who gets up and suggests that this shouldn't be a busine ss -like opera tion, they're just flirting with the credit of this province. But that's not--(interjection)--you bet. Hear! Hear! Now, that's right. But it wasn"t "hear, hear" before the election. Well now I don't need to enumerate the different things--welfare, of course ; old age pensions , of course; all sorts of things . All these things that have been promised.

Yes, and my honour able friends preached that doctrine to the people of this province with no inc rease in taxation. Page 414 February lO th,. 1960

(Mr. Campbell, cont'd. ) .. And then, when we come into this House I pointed out the very first time that I spoke on behalf of my party that while we still took the position, and I was criticiz- ed by ma ny of the peo ple on that side of the House, that we still took the position that the atti tude that we had had toward these services was right. We were not changing that position. But we had to assume --we must assume that the people of Manitoba knew what they were doing . We must assume that they were voting for a farm credit act. Of course they were. That wasn't the only thing.

But that had something to do with the appeal that my honourable friends made. They were voting for crop insurance to a certain extent. It wasn't by any means the whole thing. Welfare wasn't the whole thing; these social services weren't the whole thing; the edu cational program that was manufactured by my honourable friends by a commis sion that we ap pointed wasn't the whole thing. But the combination of it--(interjection) --and the poorest imple- " mentation because the people of Manitoba are not getting value for it.

They're not getting val- ue for the crop insurance; they're not getting value for the farm credit. It's a duplication with out doing the job that it was supposed to do. They're not getting value for the amount of money that will be expended on welfare tO give the people, according to their need, because I still say that that program was better done by the municipalities and much more cheaply done with this province giving them 80% back; and it was the sensible way to do it.

But the emotional appeal that my honourable friends, aided and abetted by this group, the emotional appeal that they made carried great weight with the people of Manitoba. Of course the biggest single factor of all was Dief the Chief. He was the biggest factor of all. Everybody knows that. My honour able friend really came in clinging to his coat tails and--but these matters had been before the public, whatever other deficiencies my honourable friend's program might have had. At least it didn't suffer by the advo cacy that he gave it across the length and breadth of this province.

And so I said, and I repeat, we have got to assume if we believe in democracy at all--if we have any faith in the intelligence of the public of Manitob a--we must assume that they knew what they were doing; that they wanted these programs; and we told our honourable friends then, we've not changed our opinion about our programs. They weren't perfect, of course. We didn't make a good job of pres<:Jnting them, that's true. We had programs that we still be lieved to be right but the people have spoken and we're willing to see them put in.

And we warned my honourable friends then and there about the increases in cost that they would face; about what they would mean in civil service increase s, and that sort of thing. We warned them. My honourable friends today stand up to tell us that because we voted for them that we are there by morally and legally commi tted--nothing of the sort. We're not committed--(interjection)- no , sir; no, sir. We warned you at that time--we warned the people of the Province of Mani- . toba at the time of the election. MR. ROBLIN: ...•.• to teach them a lesson. MR. CAMPBELL: Sure.

And that 's the way they will learu too, and they 're getting their lesson--they're getting their lesson--they're getting their lesson from our honourable friend too. MR. ROBLIN: Aided and abetted by you . MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, Sir--and they're getting their lesson--no doubt about that. And so I say to my honourable friends, we have every right in the world to criticize the growth of the Civil Service and that brings me to the Civil Service.

The minister said, and I enjoyed his remarks in that regard, he said that after attending a lot of organizational meetings in different parts of Canada and the United States, and I'm sure he has, that our Civil Service compares wi.th the best in Canada or the Uni ted States in quali1:y. I think that's right. I subscribe. And i.f this government stays in very long and keeps on the rate of increase that it's got, it sure will compare with them in quantity too, because it's moving along there very fast. I don't challenge the qualitY at all.

It's good and it has been good through the years , but the quantity certainly needs to be examined and that's what we've been looking at pretty carefully here and what we intend to look at. The Honourable Minister mentioned the anonymity of the civil servants. The fact that they were not supposed to get the , credit or couldn't take the credit publicly for what often was to a large extent their work and that the Press was very good in respecting their position in that regard. And I'll tell you who else is good in respecting their position in that regard, and that's my .honourable friends .

They're sure willing to dodge the anonymity ; they're sure willing to take all the credit; they're February lOth, 1960 Page 415

(Mr. Campbell, cont'd .) .• sure willing to put out all the information that's necessary about how well they're doing. And I agree that the Civil Service is in that position but my honourable friends certainly aren't. Then my honourable friend the minister discussed at some length what happened in the previous administration and he took what appeared to me to be the advantage of the position that .he held as Chairman of the Civil Service Commis sion for a time to criticize the delays that he said occurred at that time. He said there were delays-- MR.

EVANS: May I on a point of privilege say that I don't believe I said that it was at the time that I was Chairman of the Civil Service Commission? MR. CAMPBELL: After he'd left. MR. EV ANS: After I had left a.'ld coming to know the administration of service at that time. MR. CAMPBELL: What the honourable member said will appear in due course in the Hansard and I certainly understood it to be that there were delays that he was aware of at the time that he was there.

If he was aware of them, then he should have brought them to our at tention and never that I ever recall and the honourable member would have to gi.ve us some re cord of where he brought them to our attention. If he didn 't do that, the thing he should have done i.f these delays were going on, he should have resigned, which eventually he did, because he discovered that he wasn't as non-political as he had thought. MR. EVANS: Is the honourable member suggesting that at the time I was Chairman of the Civil Service Commission that I was non-politi cal--that I was political ? MR.

CAMPBELL: I'm not a chairman of the Civil Service, but I'm suggesting that my honourable friend's political inclinations were well known at the time that we appointed him to that position. MR. EVANS: And are you im plying that th ere was anything political in my administration ? MR. CAMPBEL L: I'm not im plying that there was anything at all and in the honourable gentleman's administration, except that i.f he felt that there were unpardonable delays--or de lays of great length, he should have reported them to the government of the day, and i.f he didn't get the correction of them , he should have resigned.

And that was not the reason for which he resigned. He rasigned as he has mentioned himself, in order to go into public life, because he had the courtesy to come and tell me that he was doing that. And that's what he told me at that time. I think the honourable the minister unwittingly gave a wrong implication to the House- again it's not easy to be ce rtain of what was said--if the honourable member didn 't say this, I'm prepared to accept the correction. But I understood him to say that the members of the Commission are the appoint ees, can not be dismissed except by this House.

I think that applies to only one member of the Commission. MR. EVANS: Well I'm certainly prepared to accept that. Really, I think my impress ion has it the other way, but I certainly accept what the honourable member says as a correction. MR. CAMPBE LL: Well, I assume that it was just a slip of the tongue and I was wanting to make it plain that the otlier members of the Commission are not in that position. Well, Mr. Chairman, the honourable the ministe r and the Honourable the First Minis ter have disagreed with the

interpretation that my honourable colleague from Carillon has placed on some question --some matters in the report of the Civil Service Commission. And I suggest to any member of this House that i.f they read last year's report, apparen tly the First Minister thought that some of us hadn't read it carefully enough either last year or this year. But i.f they read last year's report where it is stated that at a meet ing of October 22nd--that Sam. B.

Newton reported the setting up of a new Treasury Board which is to replace as one of its functions the former Establishm ent Committee of Cabinet as the authority for decisions re garding all changes to departmental estimates and so on. If they read that and then read the statement this year, third paragraph, "during the year a sub-committee of the Tie asury Board was established to assist the Commissi on in the review of new classifications and reclassific a tions. This Committee is composed of a member of the staff Commissi on--Mr. Clair Smith, Chief Budget Analyst; Mr.

Harry Taylor, Director of Organization and Methods. Mr. Taylor reviews requests in the light of the methods being used in the office under considera tion and in th e organization itself. Mr. Smith considers the budget im plications and the staff member of the Commission, the proper classification :' I suggest that anyone whO" reads one of those Page 416 February lOth, 1960

(Mr. Campbell, cont•d. ) •. in connection With the other is entitled to draw the conclusion that my honourable friend did. And even though I accept, without reservation, the statement that the honourable the minister has made that the Treasury Board still has the final authority yet I still say that the very fact that they have delegated that portion of their res ponsibilities to civil servants rather than on to Ministers of the Crown means in my opinion that to that degree and in the first instance, that a good bit of the check that formerly existed on the growth of the Civil Service has been relaxed.

And no wonder in my mind--no wonder that we see this very, very alarming growth. Then another reason, Mr. Chairman, and I think that the Minister has already mention ed this one, in my opinion another reason for the rapid growth is contained in that 1958 report where we're told that the Commission authority to make appointments on its own res ponsibility without referenc e to the Cabinet or to the Treasury Board had been extended at that time to co ver·p ositions where the maximum salary is $6 ,0 00 or less. Now do I read this report correct ly in that regard?

Instead of these appointments being made to Order-in-Council as formerly with the exception as I read it, that unless the appointee is 50 years of age or over. There again is a great relaxation, in my opinion, of the check should be held by the government of the day upon the growth of the Civil Service which my honourable friends themselves admit is very easy to see accomplished. Then my final point, Mr. Chairman, is the one of comp laint and I think it's a justified com plaint in the fact that the two reports that we have presented to us here give fig ures which vary from one another.

And I think that surely--surely , it should be the res ponsibility of the minister to see that these repo rts are on a comparable basis before they come to our desks .

Because if the honourable members will take the report of last year and look at the figures that are given as the number of employees, and I admit that this includes holiday, relief and other short-term placements, but if they look at those figu res as being the figures of the 31st Decem ber, 1958, and then turn--and we would be justified, I think, in taking those as being the fig ures --then turn to the report that was put on our desks a day or two ago where the figures are giv en with three years, we will find that the 1958 figures do not agree in the latter report with the former report.

In other words, going down the list we start \1/ith agriculture as furnished last year to us, 270; this year, 220; Attorney-General, last year, 546; this year, 525; and so on. And I recognize the fact that if in one case the holiday relief staff and oilier short-term replace ments are included, and in the other case it isn't them of course, there's going to be a dis crepancy. But my point is that in furnishing the figur es to us --they 're diffi cult enough to get on a proper basis anyway--that we should at least have them on a comparable as com pared to the diff erent years.

Surely there should be unifo rmity in doing this. And this is not an easy exercise in arithmetic to get the actual increase in Civil Service salaries at any time. And I think that the minister should insist that the aata that are furnished should be on the most corn parable basis that is possible. So, Mr.

Chairman, I thought I would simply place that on record and perhaps the Minis ter can make some investigations and find out what is the diff erence between the two and try and bring them into confor mity, one with the other • • • . . • . • • • . . • . • . • . • continued on next page .. - February lOth, 1960 Page 417

MR . J. M. FROESE (Rhirieland): Mr . Chairman , I've watched with interest the debate that was going on this afternoon, however, I'd like to place a question more or less for informa tional purposes . I take it that the salary increases as shown take· into account the regular incre ments made , the re class ifications that take place , and also any additional number of employees engaged. HoweYer, were there any basic or percentage increases made in salaries across the · board, and if so , to what extent? MR. ROBLIN: If I might just before we leave the topic of the last speech but one, Mr.

Chairman , there is a point that I'd like to explore a little further beca use I think it illustrates a very fundamental difference of view between the Honourable the Leader of the Op position and myself, because a great deal of the argument today has been revolving around the propriety of the members of the Liberal Party voting for government policy in one instance , then claiming the right to be critical of the consequences of having voted for that policy in another. The Hon ourable the Leader of the Oppo sition has expressed his view of this thing.

He's told us that he felt that he was obliged to listen to the opinion of the voters in this particular ma tter; that he was obliged to take into account the fact that the electors of Manitoba )lad voted for the govern ment; and, therefore , that he felt that he had no alternative but to vote for the policy even though he thought it was wrong; even though he still thinks it was wrong; even though he has never had any other views but that it is wrong. In other words , he has told us that it is proper for him to violate his own conscience in these matters.

He has told us that it is proper for him to set aside his own sincerely held and convinced opinion on these matters beca use the electors had spoken. Well I think that cuts across a very vital consideration. I :think that that is not the way in which a member of Parliament or the Legislative Assembly ought to app roach his duties.

I'm not going to make any lengthy address on the subject, but ! merely wish to say that the classic exposition of the point of view that I'm trying to express this afternoon-(Interjection) yes, my friend says Edmund Burke and I think it may do him a little good if I just read part of his speech from the electorate of Bristol -- (Interjection) -- Well I think you haven't paid any attention to it then. "Gentlemen it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence and the most unreserved communication with his constituents .

Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion high respect ; their business unremitted attention. It is his duty to sa crifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions to theirs , and above all, ever and in all cas es, to prefer their interests to his own, but his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience he ought not to sac rifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure , no, nor from the law or the constitution. They are a trust from Providence , for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable .

Your· representative owes you not his industry only but his judgment, and he betrays you instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion." Now there is more but that illustrates the point that I'm trying to make . I do not believe it to be rigl}_t. Even under the circumstances that my honourable friend has explained, that he or his party should vote for policies in which they do not agree. Under the circumstances I can't see why that should be necessary.

The situation is clear; the voters have their rights to express their views but they elected my honourable friend to have the advantage of his experience and judgment. When he sacrifices it to what appears to be electoral pressure then I think he does himself, his party or the House no service . Now that, Sir, is the basis of my complaint and of my argument. I think that the opin ions that Burke expressed on that classic occa sion is a right one. I do not say --- I do not claim for myself that !h ave never ea rned disrespect, it may be that I have .

I know what the pressure s are under circumstances like this and I make no claim for .perfection for myself or for my friends, but I say that to have accepted "holus-bolus " all the different aspects of policy which one by one my honourable friend is willing to criticize and condemn, on the grounds that he gave , are wrong and mistaken and I believe do not really serve the public interest. MR . CAMPBELL: Mr .

Chairman, it would not be seemly I think for a junior politician like myself to attempt to improve on what Burk€ has said, and I think it's well worthwhile that the Honourable the First Minister should read into the record what Edmund Burke said on that famous occasion; but if my honourable friend will recall, there's quite a difference in the posi tion that the honourable gentleman Edmund Burke took and the one that ·! take beca use that was not a general election, and we have no record that i know of concerning what Edmund Burke Page 418 February lOth, 1960

(Mr . Campbell, cont' d. ) ..•.• would have said if there had been a general election. Edmund Burke was talking to his constituents on that matter who had approached him with regard to a particular iss ue and recommended that he do thus and so -- (IL.terjection) -- I think that 's correct. MR. ROBLIN: I'll give it to you if you want it. MR.

CAMPBELL : Give us the reference then because it's quite different from the posi tion that I take , and I quite definitely and sincerely take the position that I do so far as a general election is concerned, where the issues were so widespread as they were iiLthis case ; where the promises had been so all-embracing as those of my honourable friend . MR.

ROBLIN.: I'll just read you the next paragraph which I think makes the si tuation perfed:ly clear : Burke was making this speech in· response to an address made by his opponent , and his opponent said that he would subjugate his opinion to that of the electo rs , and this is what it says: "My worthy colleague" and there Burke refers to his opponent, says , " his will ought to be subservient to yours. If that be all , the thing is innocent . If government were a matter of will upon my side , yours without question ought to be su perior .

But government and legis lation are matte rs of reason and judgment and not of inclination , and what sort of reason is that in which the determination preceds the discussi on in which one set of men deliberate and _ another decide , and wh ere those who form the conclusions are perhaps 300 miles distant from those who hear the argument." I think that bears exactly on the point and I don't think there's anything that I can say would add to it. MR. CAMPBELL: Well, Mr . Chairman, it does not bear on the point beca use it is not , as I previously mentione d, it is not dealing with the result of a general election.

MR. ROBLIN: No , but it .••.• MR. GROVES: Can I get into this for a little while ? MR. PREFONT AINE: I would like to carry on thi s point for just a second. I would just like to carry on this point and say that I'm sure , Mr . Chairman, if I went to the library and searched for half an hour I could find an author to defend the pos ition that we have taken in this problem. You can prove Rnything by quoting someone . Now I'm in the same position as my leader in this matter. These were debatable points . To my mind they were not a question of doing violence to on e's conscience at all. There were debatable points .

We took the stand and I took the stand that as far as farm loans were concerned the Federal Government was doing it. We tried to improve it, to make it apply better to the conditions in Manitob a, and we thought our province should not get in to it and we did not get in to it. These were debatable points . And when the time came to say "yes" or "no" when you presented the Bill , I consc ientiously analyzed the Bill . I did not think that I was a super man and that I knew it all. I did not want to deprive the majority of the electors of. this province of the opportunity of trying this measure .

I did not do violence to my conscience at all . And I said if the majority apparently wanted it, let them have it. I tried to improve it -- to reduce the inte rest rate from 6 to 5 -- that 's fine . But I did not think of myself to be a super man. And I want to say that I have confidence in the people of Manitoba and I have confidence that , through the process of trial and error, they will find the error of their ways and do a different thing next time they come to the polls. MR. GROVES: Mr . Chairman, I've been trying to get into this fight three times now. MR.

CHAIRMAN: It was the member for Elmwood caught my eye first. MR. PETERS: I heard the First Minister mention that 17 of these extra civil servants that are being hired are going to be used with regard to safety in indu strial plants. Is that correct? MR. ROBLIN: •.••.• The Report of the Commission. MR. PETERS: Well , Sir , my question with regard to this was this: If they are hiring these 17 extra people in thi s age of automation, in many industrial plants the re are many mechanical devices that are used to handle equipment .

I was wondering if any of those people would be used to go .through the plants and inspect the equipment and see that it was being oper ated in a safe manner. MR. ROBLIN: I think the Minister of Labour will deal with that matter when his estim ates are up -- there will be a full discussion on these points . . MR. GROV ES: To get back, Mr. Chairman, to the points that were raised by the February lOth, 1960 Page 419

(Mr. Groves, cont' d.) .•••. Honourable the Leader of the Opposition , I think there 's a great deal of inconsistency in his argument. When the matter of farm credit was before this House , when the Bill came in for first reading his group was in favour of it in principle. When that Bill went to committee and we argued about the details, the Bill came back into the House and when we all had to stand and be counted on it , everyone of his group stood up and voted for it. The same happened in the new education plan.

They supported the Bill .in principle; they argued about it in committee ; and they came back into the House and they all voted for it . The Industrial Development Fund was the same way. They approved it in principle; they argued about it in committee as is their right; and they came back into the House and voted in favour of it. Now I really don't think that the members of the Liberal Party voted for these because they approved of them. I think that they voted for it because these things would look bad politically if they didn 't vote for them.

These were popular and I think that the Liberals wanted to go along for the ride . We've heard a lot in the last few days about the vast promises that were made by the Conservative Party during the election campaign and we've had pieces of advertising literature quoted from all over the place.

Now I have a piece of Liberal advertising literature that was circulated in my constituency , and there is sure quite a comparison, and I'm going to quote two paragraphs from it: "A hungry unemployed man who can barely earn enough to keep house and home together is not concerned with a politician' s vision or a governmeut' s desire to get on with the business of Manitoba, but he is interested in a sound government program to improve economic conditions and help him to a better way of living.

The chief defect of the Conserva tives is that they are wrong in making extensive promises but not mentioning the future cost to the taxpayer. The Bible says that, 'man does not live by bread alone•. The tories would be wise to adopt these words for they , the traditional party of busin ess , are also wrong in consider ing the government as a busine ss. It is much more than that. It is an agency for human better ment. " I think that this type of thing and the type of thing that we have been listening to in this House was a pretty desperate appeal at that time for the Liberal Party to get back into office .

That letter was written and circulated on behalf of a young man who was quite prominent in the young Liberal movement, and it was endorsed by the past president of the Liberal Associ ation. If these paragraphs , or these references to "hungry men" and "the party of big busin ess," if these were the Liberal point of view on economic conditions in Manitoba as they were at that time, then surely they are out of touch with the situation in this province.

They deserved to be defeatsd when they were defeated, and they deserved to be defeated in the election that followed that, because surely they couldn't blame those type of conditions if they existed at that time on the Conservative Government, because it was they who had directed the economic destiny of this province for many, many years prior. I don't blame the Honourable Leader of the Opposition for sticking to principle, but if something is wrong then it's wrong all the time . It isn't some times wrong and sometimes right .

If the Conservative program was wrong on the�ustings tren it rp.ust have been wrong in the House . But it wasn't wrong in the House to them, it was right . And then during the following election campaign it was wrong again. And now it's wrong even again , not only in principle but in the details. -- (Interjection) -- Pardon? Ah the election is a long ways from now. So I suggest that they were willing to sacrifice this holy principle of theirs to teach the people of Manitoba a lesson. And in my opinion this isn't too good an argument. MR . CAMPBELL : Can I ask the honourable member a question ?

I understood him to say that he thought that we had gone .along with the farm credit policy because we thought it was good politics . Is that what be said? MR . GROVES: Yes . I suggested that in my opinion your group voted for this, not be cause they thought it was a good thing for the Province of Manitoba, but because you thought it was politically expedient at that time to do so . MR. CAMPBELL: Now is my honourable friend prepared to argue from that that the reason the government brought it in was because they thought it was good politics? MR .

GRO VES: That it was part of the Conservative Party's program that they had been advocating for many years before this particular election campaign. MR . CAMPBELL : I was asking the honourable member, Mr .Chairman, if he thought it was good politics? Page 420 February lOth, 1960

MR. GROV ES: Yes, I thought it was good politics ••.•• MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Chairman, this has been a most interesting afternoon. As a matter of fact along about 2:30 just as we left our caucus room some of my colleagues were asking me about how long it would be before we got into the Department of Education and I said, well , there 's only three more items on the Provincial Secretary, and I would suggest that we'd be there about a quarter past three. We prepared for the Honourable Minister of Education but apparently such is not the case. Now we have had a most interesting afternoon on this particular subject.

It has been nice and free and easy and there's been charges exchanged across the floor of the House , all in goodwill of course, and we've even had Sir Edmund Burke brought in to the Civil Service of the Province of Manitoba. But I think, Sir, to put it in its proper per spective I should simply say this , that much of the blame, if not all of the blame for the increase in the civil servants of Manitoba should rest on the shoulders of the CCF Party. My honourable friend mentions the fact the changes in education was due to a fact of the setting up of a Royal Commission on Education which we appointed.

I think it's an historic fact as far as the setting up of the Royal Commission on Ed ucation in Manitoba that our party was to the fore in requesting a Royal Commission on Education many years before it was set up . It took a lot of convincing before the Liberals, when they were in power, set up a Commission. We of our party had advocated for years a provincial scheme of hospitalization. And for many years in advocating that we had two foes -- the Conservatives and the Liberals.

It was only due to our persistence both here and at Ottaw a that eventually such a system came into being here in the Province of .Manitoba, indeed, permissive right across Canada. We of the CCF had for years in this House and elsewhere drawn to the attention of governments, both Liberal and Conservative, the inadequacies in the treatment of those who may be in a position to receive welfare and other benefits akin to that. As a result of our persistence , Mr.

Chairman, over the years , the Conservatives made an appeal to the people of Manitoba based practically on our philosophies and they are now the gove rnment. When the matters -- when the Liberals were at the end of their tether a couple of years ago they very hurriedly introduced a hospitalization scheme which we had advo�ated for years here in the Province of Manitoba. So I say, Mr.

Chairman, and I say this in all sincerety, if you're going to blame anybody at all for the in creases in the civil servants for these worthwhile things, blame the CCF, because at long last our endeavours have come to some fruition in this Legislature . MR. E. R. SC HREYER (Brokenhead): Mr. Chairman, very briefly and with de ference to the two front benchers -- the two elderly front benchers on tbe Liberal's side -- when I say elderly I don't mean that in any disparaging sense. I should have perhaps -- (Interjection) -- On the Liberal's front bench, Mr . Chairman.

Reverting back to the point of discussion which was raised by the Honourable the First Minister and which was taken up by the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition , I would merely like to say that the question which was raised is a very moot question when ever one wishes to discuss democratic procedures and democratic govern ment.

Now as I understand it, and I think that this is easy to agree with , as I understand it the modern concept of the role or function of one who is elected to sit in a parliamentary body such as this, that individual sits here as a representative of the people , his constituents and not as a delegate.

Now from what we have heard from the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition and the Honourable Member for Carillon they seem to think that the year fQllowing a provincial election they are here as mere delegates; then the second year they are half· delegate -h alf representative; the third year three quarter-- one quarter and the year before the election they take their normal course , what is expected of them, and they become representatives of their constituents . Now I'm somewhat surprised because as a young man in politics I always did look to these two for a certain amount of guidance insofar as th

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	26-2-17
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	26th 2nd hansardpdf 17.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	287dfcd8c5125111533c69bcd02622ad0af622f2

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