Manitoba Hansard — 21 June 1989 (Sitting 24, 34th Legislature, 2nd Session)

34-2-24

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Second Session - Thirty-Fourth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 38 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XXXVIII No. 24 - 1:30 p.m., WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21, 1989. ISSN 0542-5492 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fourth Legislature Membe rs, Constituenc ies and Political Affiliat ion NAME ALCOCK , Reg ANGUS,John ASHTON, Steve BURRELL, Parker CARR, James CARSTAIRS, Sha ron CHARLES, Gwen CHEEMA, Guizar CHORNOPYSKI , William CONNERY, Edward, Hon. COWAN, Jay CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James , Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DRIEDGER, Herold L. DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Laurie E. EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary , Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER , Harold GRAY, Avis HAMMOND, Gerrie, Hon.

HARAPIAK, Harry HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R. HEMPHILL, Maureen KOZAK, Richard J. LAMOUREUX, Kevin M. MALOWAY, Jim MANDRAKE, Ed MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. McCRAE, James, Hon. MINENKO, Mark MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold , Hon. OLESON, Charlotte, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PANKRATZ, Helmut PATTERSON, Allan PENNER, Jack ; Hon. PLOHMAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROCH, Gilles ROSE,Bob STORIE, Jerry TAYLOR, Harold URUSKI, Bill WASYLYCIA-LEIS, Judy YEO, Iva CONSTITUENCY Osborne St. Norb ert Thomp son Swan River Fort Rouge River Heights Selkirk Kildon an Burrow s Portage la Prairie Churchill Ste.

Rose du Lac Roblin-Russell Concordia Arthur Emerson Niakw a Riel St. Jame s Lakesid e Charleswood Fort Garry Brandon East Tuxedo Virden St. Bon iface Minnedo sa Ellice Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Gimli Logan Transcona Inkst er Elmwood Assiniboi a Morris Brandon West Seven Oaks River East Rossmere Glad stone Pembina La Verendrye Radisson Rhineland Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Turtle Mountain Springfi eld St. Vital Flin Flan Wolseley Interlake St.

John s Sturgeon Creek PARTY LIBERAL LIBERA L NOP PC LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL PC NOP PC PC NOP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL NOP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC NOP NOP PC NOP LIBERAL LIBERAL NOP LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL PC PC PC PC PC LIBERAL PC NOP PC PC LIBERAL LIBERAL NOP LIBERAL NOP NOP LIBERAL

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, June 21, 1989. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions, may I direct Honourable Members' attention to the gallery where we have from the West St. Paul School, sixteen Grades 7 to 9 students under the direction of Heather Stewart. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Selkirk (Mrs. Charles) . Also this afternoon from the St. Francois Xavier School , we have twenty-six Grades 4 and 5 students under the direction of Erv Single and Bill Grant.

This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns). From the Springfield Junior High School, we have twenty-five Grades 7 and 8 students under the direction of Moira Honey. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Springfield (Mr. Roch) . From the Robert H. Smith School, thirty-one Grade 6 students under the direction of Signy Stewart. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for River Heights (Mrs. Carstairs) . On behalf of all Honourable Members , I welcome you here this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Federal Sales Tax Application Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Finance Minister (Mr. Manness). Michael Wilson has stated that he cannot control whether his national sales tax will be added on to the purchase price at the time of purchase, or if it will be built into the price . He further stated that it is a provincial matter . Will our Finance Minister tell us today what the policy will be in the Province of Manitoba? Will it be built in or will it be added on? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Spea ker, first let me say with respect to the general application of any tax that we would prefer that it be visible . That is a general statement . Specific to the news that came by way of the front page of the paper and probably caused the question to be asked by the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs), we are trying to ascertain what , within the Constitution , gives the provinc es the right to determine basically how a federal tax is to be applied within the provincial context.

Certainly it is news to us, and we are attempting right now to find out what gives us supposedly that power as indicated by Michael Wilson. It did come as news to us. na Provincial Sales Tax Reduction Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): With a supplementary question to the same Minister, if the sales tax is added on, for example, 9 percent federal tax on the purchase price, 7 percent provincial tax on the purchase price , that will not result in any additional revenues to the province.

But if the federal tax is a hidden tax , it will in fact result in about a 1 percent increase in tax paid into the coffers of the Province of Manitoba. Will the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) tell the House today if his Government will commit to reducing the sales tax in this province, if cascading or building it in results from the national sales tax? *

(1335) Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, the question is fair and it again comes from a Free Press

article that was written by Fred Cleverley on the past weekend, but -(Interjection)- I will answer the question. To the Members opposite, I will answer the question . Again , my statement holds that visible taxes are a fairer representation. As far as the degree to which the province may offset some of its share or its rate given that it may take in more under one system versus the other, no determination has been made on that. That is a policy decision that would have to be made by the Government of Manitoba. Federal Sales Tax Revenue Neutral Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, with a supplementary question to the same Minister , this Minister has consistently said that he wants the national sales tax to be revenue neutral. Will he guarantee in the House today that it will be revenue neutral in that he can control the rate of the provincial sales tax and that will be affected if cascading is permitted? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Again , I give the same response .

Depending on what system ultimately comes into place and given the fact that we prefer to see visible taxes-indeed the sales tax of Manitoba is very much a visible tax-and given in the past that supplier mark throughs, and indeed to a lesser degree the federal tax on liquor , is something that we have tried not to gain additional revenues from, that ultimately all becomes part of a policy decision that will be made by this Government .

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 Manitoba Telephone System Sales Tax Elimination Mrs. Sharon Carstairs {Leader of the Opposition): With a new question to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), we have already seen that this Government is quite capable of adding provincial taxes on top of federal taxes , because they have continued with a policy that was initiated under the NOP with regard to the Manitoba Telephone System whereby provincial tax is assessed on federal tax.

Can the Minister of Finance tell us today if he is prepared to eliminate this provincial tax on federal tax with regard to Manitoba Telephone System subscribers? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Again, Mr. Speaker, that was part of the Fred Cleverley article, so I must say that same consideration. Again, I say to the Member opposite that has not been discussed in the policy development sense on behalf of this Government to this point in time .

No doubt , given once the full implications and the full implem entation of the national sales tax , the goods and services tax comes about in January 1991 , that will be a decision point at which time the Government will have to have made those decisions . At this point , it has not . Mrs. Carstairs: One keeps hearing Fred Cleverley men tioned . Maybe the Minister is considering resigning and allowing the Premier to appoin t Fred Cleverley as the Minister of Finance and then may be we will get some action . Federal Sales Tax . Tourism Impact Mrs.

Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): With a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance , we learned today that the ERDA agreement in Tourism will not be renewed . We have learned from the Conference Board that $1 billion will be taken from the tourism industry as a result of the national sales tax . Can the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) tell the House today exactly what will be the effect on tourism and tourism dollars in the Province of Manitoba as a result of the national sales tax? Hon.

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): I cannot give the Leader of the Opposition a definitive response to that, because again that would require a model to have been in place and to have run to give the results as to what an added tax would mean . Certainly , the Conference Board of Canada recognizes that there will be some inflationary aspects to the imposition of the new national goods and services tax . Obviously , that means that the purchasing power of those who are wanting to consume tourism services will not go as far.

Therefore ultimately, there will be som e smaller contribution to the economy through that sector. I mean, that is the theory . I understand it fully well, but to ask for a definitive response to the question, I think, is something that the Leader of the Opposition cannot expect at this time. •

(1340) ERDA Agreement Tourism Expenditures Mrs. Sharon Car stairs (Leader of the Opposition): A final supplementary question to the Minister of Tourism (Mr. Ernst) , the ERDA is cut, his department budget is cut, tour ism , which is already tenth out of 10 for all provinces in Canada here in Manitoba. Can the Minister of Tourism tell the House today how much of the $30 million ERDA agreements have actually been spent in the last four and a half years? Hon. Jim Ernst (Min ister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Seventeen million dollars. Home Care Program Underspending Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition) : Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) . Certainly, we know that over the last couple of weeks we have been making the claim that close to $21 million has been underspent in the Departm ent of Health . We could not get the answers from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) a couple of week s ago when we accused the Government of putting that money in a so-called sock for future use. We have since had it verified, that ridiculous argument.

We have had it verified in a Free Press artic le, and I will quote my source on that one this weekend , but I will use my own sources in my question to the Minister of Health . 779 Can the Ministe r of Health confirm that consistent with our claims from last year that there had been reductions in services in the Home Care field, that they have underspent the Home Care services between $4 million and $5 million in the last year, and that is part of the money that has been put in this so-called rainy day fund? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I wish my honou rable friend would share his research document with me. I must have missed that

article in the Free Press . I cannot confirm the accuracy of the dollar figure my honourable friend uses, but I can tell my honourable friend that there are increased levels of service being provided in the Home Care Program in the last fiscal year compared to the previo us fiscal year . I can also indicate to my honourable friend that any underspending in the Department of Health did not appear , as my honourable friend wishes to allege and lead the public to beli eve, in the so-called trust fund set up by the Min ister of Finance (Mr. Manness).

That is absolutely a false accusation by the Leader of the New Democratic Party . Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker , the Min ister did not confirm the numbers and he knows them full well. He is a well briefed Minister .

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 New Admissions Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): My question to the Minister is, has there been a reduction in the number of new admissions to the Home Care Program based on the vigorous implementation of the policy by this Government and indeed the cutbacks that are taking place in the Home Care Program , cutbacks that have been taking place specifically in the North End of the City of Winnipeg , with the policy that this Government has put in place with the people , our aging population and others who need the Home Care services in this province?

Why did he not leave that $4 million to $5 million in the Home Care Program for our people and our patients in Manitoba? Why did he put it in the so-called Tory trust fund? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order , please. The Honourable Minis ter of Health. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I know that the New Democratic operative method of campa igning inside and outside the House is to distort facts.

I again repeat for my honourable friend, the Leader of the New Democratic Party, that his accusation that monies have gone from the Department of Health to the trust fund are totally and absolutely false . If he wishes to continue with that accusation, nothing prohibits him from doing that but I wish him to know that he is not telling the truth, Mr. Speaker . He is not telling the truth period, period . Mr. Speaker: Order, please . The Honourable Membe r for Thom pson (Mr. Ashton) on a point of order . Mr. Steve Ashton (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr.

Speak er, yesterday , in a phrase that was probably less direct tha n the phrase just used by the Minister , invo lving the Member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) , the Member for Flin Flon withdrew unequivocally the phrase that he used. I would suggest that the Minister of Health , just having repeated twice the suggestion that the statements made by the Member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) are not true, which I think is highly debatable given the facts, but beyond that it is clearly unparliamentary . I would ask you to have the Minister of Health withdraw that statement . *

(1345) Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, did my honourable frien d have a point of order? Mr. Speaker: Order , please . The Honourable Member does not have a point of order. A d ispute over the facts is not a point of order . Mr. Orchard: Absolutely. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Member for Concordia (Mr. Doer). 780 Mr. Doer: Is he still ram bling on? Mr. Speaker : I believe so. He was i nterjected by a point of order. The Honourable Minister of Health . Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker , if " rambling on " is trying to make an honest person of the Leader of the New Democratic Party, yes, I am.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please . As the Honourable Min ister is quite aware, all Members in this Chamber are Honourable Members. Therefore , I would ask the Honourable Minister of Health to kindly withdraw those remarks . Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker , I did not call him a dishonourable Member, but I will withdraw whatever you found objectionable to the House that I have said . Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Minister of Health . Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker , I am very confident in this issue because when the Fourth Quarter figures come out , as the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) knows , the numbers will be there, and it will be close to the $21 million I have been maintaining and that he had confi rmed over the weekend, unless they find another bookkeeping way to change it. Underspending Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): My quest ion is to the Minister of Health.

Why will he not confi rm, over the budget that we approved in this Leg islature last year, the budget for the Home Care Program that we approved collectively last year, that he indeed cut back between $4 million and $5 million in underspending for the elderly , the aged and the othe r people who required the Home Care services , which we brought forward case after case last year and have been forwarding to the Minister of Health over the last year? Why will he not confirm the truth in terms of the numbers and the cutbacks? Mr. Speaker: Order, please .

The Honourable Member for Concordia is quite aware that the Honourable Member should ascertain the accuracy of his facts before bringing it to the Legislature. Would the Honourable Member kindly rephrase his question? Mr. Doer: Will the Minister now confirm that he underspent $4 million to $5 million in the Home Care Program in- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. I have asked the Honourable Member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) to kindly rephrase his question because the Honourable Member has to ascertain the facts before bringing it to the Legislature . Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker , I would ask the Minister of Health why, when he said that there were no cutbacks

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 in the Hom e Care Progra m, why did he u nder spen d the Home Care Progra m between $4 milli on and $5 million in the fiscal year, cutting back that money in his unde rspendin g fo r the aged, for the elderly and for the peop le who need the Home Care Progr am in this provinc e? Hon. Donald Orchard ( Minister of Health ): M r. Speaker, I cannot co nfirm the accu racy of my honourable friend's numbers simply because I have not seen the year-end March 31 numbers from the department and the Manitoba Health Services Commission.

When I have those numbers, I will confirm to the last dollar what is involved in last year 's spending . Let me indicate to my honourable friend , because his allegations of cutbacks have been disproven every single step of the way, absolutely disproven . When we approve budgets in this House, I want to remind my honourable friend, the Leader of the New Democratic Party, that those numbers are maximum expenditures that we are given approval to spend .

If the admissions to Home Care or any program do not meet the projections made some 15 months before the end of the year or longer in some cases, then the budget is underspent, the same way it was underspent in 1985- 86 by the NDP. Mr. Doer: The last year we were in office we overspent it because we were dealing with the aging population through Supplementary Estimates, and the Minister well knows that . My last question to the Minister of Health -(Interjection)- my final question to the -(lnterjection) the aging population was a priority of ours . You are absolutely right.

Perhaps it should be for the Minister responsible for Seniors (Mr. Downey). Health Care Underspending Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): My question to the Minister, has there been any underspending in his department in the '88-89 fiscal year in major surgical areas, such as the surgery that we have seen and the line-ups that we have seen at the Health Sciences Centre, and in anaesthesiology in terms of the Province of Manitoba, another area that is begging for help from the Minister of Health . •

(1350) Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, as we explained last week when we were on a multi-Party , I guess it was, television debate on this issue of open-heart surgery that my honourable friend has referenced, I indicated then and I will indicate now that more open-heart procedures were done in the first year of our Government than have ever been done in the history of the Province of Manitoba. The waiting list has increased admittedly, and we are investigating why that has happened in one hospital compared to the second hospital providing open-heart surgery.

The bottom line remains, which my honourable friends in both the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party will not admit , that there were more 781 op en- heart pr ocedur es and mo re ang io plasty proc edures done last year under our Governm ent than ever in the history of the Provi nce of Manit oba, an increa se in service to those Manitob ans needing that service . Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): And , Mr. Speake r, more people on the waiting list. ERDA Agreements Tourism Termination Mr.

Reg Alcock (Osborne): On March 31 of this year, economic regional development agreements representing more than $240 million in federal investment in this province lapsed. Now we are informed that the $30 million Tourism Agreement will not be renewed. This Government priorized tourism as a major area for economic development. Last Session during Estimates , the Minister responsible stated that we need to spend some money in order to prepare ourselves to run a new marketing program next year . This year, the marketing program has been cut .

The Minister was not even aware that the ERDA had lapsed or it was not going to be renewed, and he has no awareness of the impact of the sales tax on the industry . My question to the Minister responsible for Tourism (Mr. Ernst) is, how is he going to meet the commitments contained in his own Throne Speech? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, part of the problem of obtaining your research from the front page of the paper is that very often it does not reflect the facts. With regard to the exist ing ERDA Tourism Agreement , I indicated to the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs .

Carstairs) in her fina l question , $17 million has been spent , $13 million has been allocated and is in the process of being committed over the next 10 months. We have until March 31, 1990, to commit funds under that agreement. We have a further 18 months after that through which to flow the money so that until September 30 , 1991, there will be funding flowing to the tourism industry in the Province of Manitoba through the Tourism Agreement . In terms of the Honourable Member 's suggestion that the tourism marketing budget has been cut, it has not.

I indicated during the Budget Debate , I believe it was , that if they had bothered to look at the tourism global figures for marketing they would have known, or if they asked me they would have known that the funding under the marketing budget was overspent in 1987-88, had to be picked up in '88-89 , so that the net result is no different than it was last year. Mr. Alcock: In face of 5 percent inflation, that is indeed a cut , although the number is 8 percent.

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 Negotiations Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, it was ju st yesterday when the Premier (Mr. Filmon) assured us that they were actively negotiating these ERDAs and the other economic development issues which will be of, to use his words , benefit to Manitoba . Today, the very next day, we hear that the ERDA agreement will not be renewed. Can the Premier info rm us of the status of the other agreements that he is currently negotiating? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr.

Speaker, as the Prem ier has indicated and I will indicate again today to Members of the House , all earlier agreements-let me suggest, first of all, that the use of the term ERDA may not be what ultimately happ ens. Economic development agreements for Manitoba are under discussion at the moment with the federal Government. We are discu ssing those.

As a matter of fact, this alleged story that the Member opposite refers to with regard to the Tourism Agreement came from a meeting of Tourism Ministers two weeks ago wherein the Tourism Minister for the country indicated tourism funding of this nature would not now be delivered by the Tourism Department, but would be delivered in the case of western Canada by the Western Diversification Offic e, in the case of Atlantic Canada by the Atlantic Opportunities Office . So the question that it is not going to be renewed is also not entirely correc t.

On a technical basis, yes; on a practical basis , it is under discussion at the present time . *

(1355) Mr. Alcock: So now we go to the WOO, which has been cut in itself, for money that has been cut from Manitoba, when we know we get a disproportionately small share of t hat money . ERDA Agreements Premier Intervention Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker , perhaps a question to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) though, similar to the question I asked him yesterday , once again we hear of another federal program that has been allowed to lapse or been allowed to lapse to the detriment of Manitoba. The eastern Premiers have been able to arrange meetings with the Prime Ministe r.

When will the meeting with this Prem ier (Mr. Filmon) take place with the federal Prime Minister to discuss these issues? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier) : Believe me, Mr. Speake r, when and if I am meeting with the Prime Minister, it will be a public event that will be well-known to this Member and to anybody else who is interested. Workers Compensation Claim Delays Mr. Allan Patterson (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, today, all of us in this House rece ived a copy of the letter written on Monday . By the way, I should say my question is directed to the Acting Minister responsible for the 782 Workers Compen sation Board (Mr.

McCrae). All Members received today a copy of a letter written on Monday to the Minister responsible for the Worker s Compensation Board, expressing considerable dismay about the very lengthy waiting period for appeals at the Work ers Compensation Board. Will the Minister today tell the Hous e if he or she can give specific information as to the length of appeals now compared with a year ago? Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): The Hon ourable Member seeks specific information.

In that regard , I will take his question and pass it on to the Minister responsible and see that the Honour able Member get s his answer . Claim Analysis Mr. Allan Patterson (Radisson) : Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell the House today if the Workers Compensation Board has completed a claim analysis tha t was promised some time ago, and if so, what are the results? Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): With this question as well, I will ensure the Minister responsible is made aware of the question. Business Plan Mr.

Allan Patterson (Radisson): Again to the same Acting Minister , can he tell us the status of the promised business plan from the Workers Compensation Board? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I am sure the Minister will want to answer that question as well. ERDA Agreements Northern Development Agreement Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned from the federal Minister of Small Business and Tourism, Mr. Hockin, that the federal Government would not be renewing its commitments under Economic and Regional Development Agreements as they expire.

My question is to the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey). Considering that both the Northern Development Agreement and the Special ARDA Agreement with the federal Government has expired on March 31 , 1989, has the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) entered into negotiations with the federal Government to renew these agreements? Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Yes, Mr. Speaker . Native Economic Development Policy Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): These two cost shared programs provide the essential human and economic infrastructure support to the northern and

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 Native communities . This Government has a year and a half to negotiate these agreements. I believe the federal Government will simply let the NDA and Special ARDA agreement expire . This means a cut of $72 million under these two programs , together with the Native Economic Development Program .

My question to the Minister is, what plans does he have to ensure that the services to the aboriginal peopl e and communities such as the education of Nativ e teachers, Northern Nursing Program , Northern Bachelor of Social Work Program, assistance to upgrade sewer and water facilities, and the support to maintain traditional Native economic endeavours like trapping and fishing? •

(1400) Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I thank the Member for that question dealing specifically with the Northern Development Agreement and other agreements as it relates to northern Manitoba . I have had a series of meetings with the federal Government. Staff have been meeting very aggressively these last few days .

In fact, Monday senior offic ials of my department and senior officials of the federal Government met to discuss, under the Native Economic Development Program that was recently announced of some $800-and-some million, we are preparing , with the federal Government, a Memorandum of Understanding as to how we, the province , and the people of the northern and Native communities , can benefit from that program . So there is an aggressive Memorandum of Understanding being worked on and we will be announcing that very shortly, Mr. Speaker. Provincial Contribution Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): Mr.

Speaker, I am very concerned that the provincial Government has nothing in place to deal with the crisis that will resul t from the termination of these agreements. Last week , the federal Government announced a Canadian Aboriginal Economic Development Strategy to help fund commercial projects over five years , but it would not provide support for human and committee projects I have just outlined. I want to ask the Minister of Northern Affairs , what is the provincial Government expected to contribute to this program?

Will it make any decisions how the funds are allocated and how much can we expect here in Manitoba from this fund? Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Mr. Speaker , we want to make it very clear that when we were elected into office there was not a long-term agreement in place . In fact, all the former administration were able to accomplish was a one-year extension two different times. So they really did not have a long -term agreement in place, they had a band aid approach to northern development and nothing firm or nothing long term.

They had two one-year band-aid approaches , so we came into office where there had 783 not been any long-term planning on behalf of the North or Nativ e communities. So let it -(Interjection)- Well, Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the New Depper s does not wan·t to hear the answer, then -(Inter jection) - He will have his opportunity. But I say, the Member asked a specifi c question . I told him in my earlier answer that we were working on a Memo ran dum of Under standing with the federal Government , working very aggressively, and I hope within days that we are able to make a public announcement on it.

Rafferty-Alameda Dam Project Environmental Impact Study Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, when Lucien Bouchard was appointed as federal Environment Minister, replacing Tom McMillan, he said he would car ry out to the letter all federal environment rules , laws and regulations , and then said , never, ever will jobs be ever considered impacted in any way from any environmental protection . He also said he would correct the wrongs on Rafferty Alameda, as carried out by his predecessor and the former Environment Minister here and the Environment Minister in Saskatchewan.

Well, we know he stopped very short of a full, formal Stage 2 EIS, complete with a public hearings process and an independent panel. So the question I have for our Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cummings) is, what assurances has he rece ived in writing from Mr. Bouchard that he will actually carry out that formal EIS on the Shoal Lake gold mine? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker , I presume this question was prompted again by the reporting that we saw in the Free Press today. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order.

The Honourable Member for Wolseley has asked his question. I am sure he would like his answe r. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker , the fact is that we are in very serious negotiations with both the federal and the Ontario provincial Government as to what would be an acceptable and highly detailed assessment of the Shoal Lake project. He is indicating, from what he has read in the article, that there is a commitment to a federa l EIS. That is not the case.

The federal Minister has indicated to me personally , the same as he obviously indicated in response to questions in Ottawa, that he would assure that an assessment was done properly and in terms of what he considers adequate, and that may very well be a decision that he will have to make on whether or not Ontario comes forward with an adequate enough process . Mr. Taylor: As usual, the assurances are not exactly clear-cut. As a result of my visit to Stevens Island on Monday -

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 Mr. Speaker: Order , please; order, please. The Chair is having some difficulty this past couple of days with this post-amble that we seem to be getting. These are not a

preamble nor are they a question , so therefore they would be out of order . The Honourable Member for Wolseley , with a supplementary question , please. Mr. Taylor: I assume those rules will be app lied to everybody equally . Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order , please ; order , please. The Honourable Member is coming very close to reflecting on the Chair. I have said that the Chair has been having some difficulty for the last couple of days . I would ask the Honourable Member to kindly withdraw those remarks. Mr. Taylor: Those comments are withdrawn . Mr.

Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Member for Wolseley. Gold Mine-Shoal Lake Tailing Sample Analysis Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Mr. Speake r, my question to the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings) is, in that I was able to supply him with samples of ore from Stevens Island from the visit I had there Monday , when will he carry out an analysis of those tailing samples and provide same to this House? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order , please; ord er, please . The Honourable Minister of the Environment. Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): First of all, yes, I have received the samples from the Member for Wolseley (Mr. Taylor). I want to indicat e to him that we have been indicating in this House for quite length of some time tha t we would be doing an analysis on and around the island . We have indicated that we would have that done befo re the end of this month. We would be sending people who were qualified hydrologists and qualified in the mineral area to take the samples and then oversee the analysis. We will also analyze the samp les that he has brought forwar d.

We will take samples that would be taken in a similar manner so that we may have a compar ative sample and not unnecessarily cre ate an impression that the situation on this island is out of control by possibly having taken a sample that canno t be tota lly verifi ed or repeated. For that reason, we will certa inly b e checking quit e carefully on what we have in terms of the samples that the Member has brought forward .

I want to indicate that this is no way reflects on his responsibility in bringing them forward, but that we want to have verifiable samples in all cases . 784 Winnipeg Water Protection Group Funding Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Wolseley, with his final supplementary question. Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): In that the only citizen group organized to fight for the maintenance of the pristine qualities of Shoal Lake is the Water Protection Group, WPG , the question to the Environment Minister (Mr.

Cummings) is, will he invol ve WPG in all his discussions between his department and Ontario and the City of Winnipeg? Will he consider funding their operations , and will he consider usin g them as guides when his official s finally do inspect the Steven s Island site? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker , there is a long list of quest ions there. First of all, let me indicate that I have met on a couple of occasions with the organization. At our first meeting, we indicated that we would share information .

Certainly, they felt that they had information that was valuable to us and offered to share what they had at that time , and certainly we will keep them apprised . Garrison Diversion Project Manitoba Impact Mr. Harry Harapiak (The Pas): My question is also to the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cumm ings), and I also want to comment that the Winnipeg Water Protection Group has been doing an excellent job of educating everyone of the importance of Shoal Lake to the citizens of Winnipeg . Mr. Speaker , Manito bans are well aware of the harmful effects posed by the Garrison Irrigation Project in our waters .

While the full project has been mothballed for quite some time, there remains considerable support in North Dakota for the transfer of water from the Missouri water basin and the construction of the Lonetree Dam and Reservoir. Can the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cummings) tell this House whether he has had an opportunity to familiarize himself with the project, and how is he being kept abreast of the project and how it may affect Manitoba? *

(1410) Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker , if I may, just to indicate to the House and to the Honourable Member for The Pas, it is through my department and the office of Mr. Bob Clarkson that maintains a continuing monitoring service on what is happening on the Garrison . The Honourable Member is correct. There are reasons that we ough t to be monitoring tha t project . Currently, an appropriation Bill is moving through the federa l House in Washington that adds some add itional $28 million to the project.

In other words , proponents for the Garr ison Project have not given up their hopes and aspirations of enlarging the project to its intended scale and size, which has problems for Manitoba .

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 I invite the Honourable Member to contact Mr. Bob Clarkson of my department at our Boundaries Waters office , now located in the basement of this building, for any information from time to time on that subject matter . Mr. Harapiak: Mr. Clarkson did an excellent job for us when we were working towards stopping th at Garrison Diversion . Funding Appropriation Mr. Harry Harapiak (The Pas): I would like to ask the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cummings), from an environmental perspect ive, is he aware that yesterday the U.S.

House Appropriation Committee in Washington approved $25 million for the Garrison Diversion Water Project in 1990? Is he aware that it is $17 million more than the U.S. President himself had asked for, had recommended for the committee, and has he contacted the U.S. department to see what parts of the diversion it is going to be appropriated to? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, as was indicated by the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns), his department and mine are working quite closely on these trans-boundary water questions .

I certainly will be wanting to keep myself apprised through Mr. Clarkson as he follows the progress of that, and I will be quite interested to see if that is the precursor of some action that is intended. Mr. Harapiak: The Bill HR 2696 passed yesterday includes some strong statements in support of future funding for the project . It was also confirmed by the senator from North Dakota and the comments were supported by several speakers in the House . Will the Minister attempt to get details to see how this allocation is going to be affecting the water projects, how they will be affecting the waters of Manitoba?

Mr. Cummings : Mr. Speaker , that goes without question that we absolutely will be following that project because certainly it is well-known that the proponents have never admitted they would be prepared to accept anything other than the going forward of that project. Handicapped Students Transitional Committee Ms. Avis Gray (Ellice): My question is for the Minister of Education (Mr. Derkach). The Minister had indicated in this House the other day that there was a transitional planning committee that had been established across three departments and his department is certainly represented.

The Prince Charles graduates graduate this evening and there are many graduates from other special programs throughout the city who will be graduating in the next couple of weeks. Can the Minister of Education tell the House today, have plans been established for programs for these graduates? Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr.

Speaker, I have to indicate to the Member that the transition committee that has been set up between the three departments was set up to plan for the transition of students who are graduati ng and are going into the post-education program , if you like , into the com muni ties . The committee met on June 7 and certainly have discussed their mandate on how to approach the many cases, not just in the Prince Charles , but there are many others that they are addressing. There will be another meeting scheduled in order to be able to address those concerns.

This is a new and innovative step to help those students who have handicaps to be able to acclimatize themselves to a post-education kind of community program. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Ellice will have time for one final supplementary question. Ms. Gray: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I find it interesting that the Minister has indicated this group has met only once when the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Oleson) told us that this committee was in place one year ago. Can the Ministe r of Education (Mr. Derkach) indicate why he and the Minister of Family Services (Mrs .

Oleson) do not seem to have their facts straight, and why the community groups, the schools , the parents, the mentally handicapped and the community services workers do not even know that this committee that is supposed to do planning exists? Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, there are continuously new programs that this Government is embarking on to assist those kinds of students who need this special kind of assistance to accommodate from the school setting to a community program.

Our Government has seen that there is a need for departments to co-ordinate these kinds of programs and, for that reason, we have an interdepartmental committee that is made up to deal with these situations, and certainly that committee is dealing with them. Mr. Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired . 785 MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a matter of urgent public importance. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Doer), that under Rule 27, the c 0 dinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely , the impact of the federal Goods and Servi ces Tax on Manitobans. Mr. Speaker: Before determining whether the motion meets the requirement s of our Rule 27, the Honourable Member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) will have five minutes to state his case for urgency of debate on this matter . A spokesperson for each of the other Parties will also have five minute s to address the position of their Party respecting the urgency of this matter. Mr. Alcock: Thank you, Mr- Speaker.

I would like to address two issues. The first is simply the opportunity,

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 or other opportunities, for debate of this matter. There are no other Bills currently before the House and we are past the Budget and the Throne Speech Debates , so I thin k the debate that we are currently into is narrower and does not allow us the opportunity. Mr. Speaker , the- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order . This is a very serious matter and the Honourable Member for Osborne does have five minutes to state his case. Each of the other Parties, as I have stated, will also have five minutes . Mr. Alcock: Mr.

Speaker, the more impo rta nt matter, the thing that mak es this a very urgent matter is that the federal Government is, today and this week, deciding the contents of its technical documents that are going to come forward descri bing how this tax is going to be implement ed. Our Finance Minister (Mr. Manness) state s that he has no knowledge of the legal positions, that he has no knowledge of the impact of this new tax on Manitoba, and right now the federal Government is making the decisions that allows them to imp leme nt this tax. Mr.

Speaker, they said , when the Finance Minister federally announced that he was going to go ahead with this tax , it was because he needed time to prepare the system to impl ement it. That is why he could not wait any longer for the provinces and that is why we had to move immediat ely. They are now moving , and yet our Min ister of Finance does not seem to have taken the time to apprise himself of the impact on this province . It is going to reduce personal income for individuals. It is going to cut job creation . It is going to harm tourism and, Mr.

Speaker, I think the federal Government needs to know very clearly how this House feels about this tax. I think the Ministe r of Finance fede rally needs to know Manitoba 's position on this tax, and we need to know it now. We need an opportunity to express that opin ion, Mr. Speaker , and the oppor tunity is today. So I would ask you to allow th is debate to proceed. Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the Opposition House Leader (Mr. Alcock) and I work together on an almost daily basis to discuss the arrangements for this House.

The Opposition House Leader knows , as I do and as the Hous e Leader for the New Democ ratic Party (Mr. Ashton) knows, that the end of June is approaching rather quickly . There are some impo rtant legislative matter s in this Legislature to be dealt with, including important matte rs such as improving safety on our highways and streets relating to impaired driving, other legislative measures that th e House Leaders have worked out togethe r dealing with othe r legislative measures. *

(1420) As a matter of fact , the Honourabl e Opposition House Leader (Mr. Alcock) and the House Leader for the New Democratic Party (Mr. Ashton) know that scheduled for today is the discussion on Bill No. 11 relating to electoral 786 divisions in this province. Now, at this stage of the day, the Opposition House Leader brings in another matter to discuss in the House, setting aside all other matters . The matter the Honourable Member raises is indeed an important matter. There is no question of the imp ortance of the matter raised by the Honourable Member today.

The fact of the matter is though, it is a federal issue, it is a federal decision that has been taken. With regard to the Honourable Member's feelings about th is issue, there are opportunities in this House . Honourable Members in this Hous e each have the opportunity to grieve . Each time the Estimates motio n is raised in the House, Honourable Members have that opportunity . The Estimates of the Department of Finance are com ing up. The Honourable Opposition House Leader could, at that time, raise the matter and spend as much time as he wishes to discuss the issue .

This was the same , the issue is not a new issue. The issue was the re at the time we had a wide-ranging debate on the Budget , wide-ranging debate on the Throne Speech , Interim Supply is coming up. The Honourable Opposit ion House Leader knows the schedu le that he and I and our coun terpart in the New Democratic Party have been working out together. Now today, we find that he wants , at the eleventh hour and with no notice to me, to change the

schedule . The rules , I thi nk, adequately cover the situation, Mr. Speaker, in this matter . At th is poin t, we have legislative initiatives that we need to get on with. We have a time consideration here and so I think the Honourable Member has ample opportunities available to him to discuss the matter he raises today. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker , I think that the Members of the Liberal Party are growing somewhat confused in terms of the role of matters of urgent public importance.

I would submit that this matter has already been debated on a matter of urgent public importance through the motion that was introduced by the Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr. Doer) on Friday, May 19, and I will just read wha t the resolution discussed . It was a matter of urgent and public importance and it discussed the impact of the federal Budget and the devastating effect on Manitoba families and communities. The federal Budget included the proposals by the federal Government to bring in the value-added tax , the national sales tax, that this motion now, on June 21 , is considering .

Now, I want to indicate that in the New Democratic Party we are quite pleased to debate the value-added tax and the national sales tax. We oppose it. We debated it on May 19. I might add that the Liberal Party, at that time, switched its initial position of opposing our matter of urgent public importance and actually supported it in the House , so it did proceed . I would submit it would be an abuse of the rules if this House was now to again debate this matter, given the fact that we did discuss it on May 19. I would also point out, Mr. Speaker, that there are other opportunities to debate it, as we have been

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 discussing . I am surprised the House Leader of the Liberal Party would be raising this, given the fact that we are discussing, as House Leaders, bringing in Interim Supply . I want to indicate, from the New Democr atic Party, that certainly we would be more than happy to bring in Interim Supply at the earliest possible opportunity in order to further debate this matter, which could be legitimate. Some Honourable Members : Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please.

This is a very serious matter and the Honourable Member for Thompson is attempting to explain to me what is the urgency of this matter. The Honourable Member for Thompson, I would like to hear his remarks . Mr. Ashton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I was saying, we in the New Democratic Party would be more than happy to co-operate in bringing Interim Supply for it as soon as possible so that we can debate these and other matters. I do feel, as I said, that this matter has already been considered .

I think there is a growing desperation on the part of the Liberal Party when having, in this Session, decide they are going to vote against everything that they are attempting, Mr. Speaker, to I think turn the rules on their heads in this particular case and bring in a matter that we have already debated. I would therefore, Mr.

Speaker , in keeping with our rules which are very clear in terms of debating matters a second time, indicate that we in the New Democratic Party, while we are certainly willing to debate the issue of the sales tax at any time, feel that the way in which this has been brought forward by the Liberal Party is not appropriate. It would be better dealt with through Interim Supply . Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order , please . I would like to thank all Honourable Members for their advice. The Honourable Member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock) has provided me with notice of this matter as required by our rules.

As Honourable Members know, Beauchesne Citation 389 provides that a matter, to be considered as a matter of urgent public importance, it must be so pressing that the public interest will suffer if it is not given immediate attention. Similarly , Beauchesne Citation 390 provides that there must be no ordinary opportunity which will allow the matter to be brought on early enough.

It is my understanding, from information contained in the federal Budget papers and from information obtained from provincial and federal Government sources that the tax referred to by the Honourable Member will be implemented on January 1, 1991. Therefore, in my opinion, the two conditions referred to in Beauchesne's have not been met. I must , therefore, rule the matter out of order as a matter of urgent public importance. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, it is with the greatest respect I must challenge your ruling. 787 Mr. Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been challenged.

Shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained? All those in favour will please say yea. All those opposed will please say nay. In my opinion, the yeas have it. Mr. Alcock: Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Call in the Members. The question befo re the House is, shall the ruling of the House be sustained? All those in favour of the motion will please rise.

YEAS Ashton, Burrell , Connery, Cummings, Cowan , Derkach, Doer, Downey, Ducharme , Driedger (Emerson), Enns, Ernst, Evans (Brandon East), Filmon, Findlay, Gilleshammer, Hammond , Harapiak, Harper, Helwer, Hemphill, Mccrae, Maloway, Manness, Mitchelson, Neufeld, Orchard, Oleson , Penner, Pankratz, Praznik , Storie , Wasylycia-Leis . NAYS Carstairs, Charles, Cheema, Carr, Alcock, Edwards, Kozak , Yeo, Angus, Gaudry, Evans (Fort Garry), Minenko, Lamoureux, Rose, Patterson, Mandrake, Gray, Taylor, Driedger (Niakwa) . Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Yeas, 33; Nays, 19. Mr.

Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been sustained. Mr. McCrae: Perhaps now, Mr. Speaker, we can get on with the agenda as agreed upon by the House Leaders . Mr. Speaker, would you be so kind as to call Bill No. 11? NON-POLITICAL STATEMENT Mr. Elijah Harper (Rupertsland): Can I have leave of the House to make a non-pol itical statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the Honourable Member for Rupertsland have leave to make a non-political statement? (Agreed) Mr. Harper: Mr.

Speaker , the Indian organizations have closed their doors today to commemorate the First Nations' special relationship with Canada and to draw attention to the continuing struggle for recognition of aboriginal and Treaty rights by the Government of Canada. June 21 is a day which the First Nations in Canada recognize as National Indian Solidarity Day. Based on a General Assembly Resolution passed in 1982, the chiefs of Canada unanimously declared that June 21 of each year will be so recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. *

(1450) Wednesday, June 21, 1989 ORDERS OF THE DAY SECOND READING BILL NO. 11-THE ELECTORAL DIVISIONS AMENDMENT ACT Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier) presented Bill No. 11, The Electoral Divisions Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les circonscriptions electorales, for second reading, to be referred to a committee of this House. MOTION presented. Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to presen t for second read ing to this House

an Act to incorpor ate changes to the electoral divisions we represent in this House . We in this province can be proud of the long-standing process that we have established to ensure the boundaries of our electoral divisions are set in an open and non-partisan fashion. This is now the fou rth time that a Government has presented the recommendations of an independent Electoral Divisions Boundaries Commission with its membership established by law and direct acco untability to this Legislature.

Dur in g the course of their deliberations, the commission held hearings in Thompson , The Pas, Winnipeg, Dauphin, Brandon, and Portage la Prairie . A total of 65 representations were made at those hearings . An additional 66 written briefs were submitted by individuals and organizations. I would like to commend the commissioners for the fine job that they have done, given the constraints of the Act. My caucus and I will be supporting this Bill when it comes to the floor of the House. But let me return to the public hearing process for a moment, Mr.

Speaker , to address the concerns that were inco rpo rated within the Electoral Divisions Boundaries Commission's report under " Othe r Observations. Althoug h the commission recognizes that it is not within thei r mandate to make recommendations regar ding regional representation, there was such a strong outc ry at the redu ction of rural and northern representation incorporated in these changes that the commissioners felt bound to include a specific

section dealing with those concerns. We as a Legislature would be derelict in our duty if we did not listen to the concerns raised in the hearings and noted in the report. We as a Legislature will be derelict in our duty if we do not act to address those concerns . Members who represent rural and northern communities face many unique and difficult challenges above those shared by urban Members. I know I do not need to remind you , Sir, of these difficulties.

Rural and northern Members have a fundamental handicap in serving their constituents through the requirement to spend much of the year here in Winnipeg, in the Legislature, rather than in their constituencies meeting and listening to the people they serve. 788 As an urban Member, I can meet constituents or attend events in my constituency with relative ease at any point in time. I have the ability to go home every night to my family. Rural and northern Members do not share these advantages. They must spend a great deal of time away from their families and away from their constituents.

Not only do the rural and northern MLAs have less time to give to their constituents, it takes them longer to get around the ir constituency. You can drive through some city ridings in less than five minutes. The new riding of Rupertslan d st retches from Fort Alexander to the Northwest Territor ies border. These difficulties must be addressed. I believe there is a two-step process to be undertaken if we are to ensure that northern and rural Manitoba receive fair and adequate representation in this Legislature. The first step is the one that we are taking as a Government.

The strongest argument for better representation for rural and northern Manitoba would be more people in rural and northern Manitoba. The changes incorpo rated into this Bill ref lect the ongoing shift of population towards Winnipeg , away from our rural and northern communities. The best means of countering that trend is to proceed with policies that foster strong economic growth and thus create opportunities for rural and northern Manitobans to stay and prosper in their home communities. We have established a number of rural and northern development programs to secure that goal.

We have certainly, throughout our short time in Government , been meeting with Chambers of Commerce, with regional business development organizations. We have established Cabinet offices in Brandon and Thompson to try and spread the influence of Government into those areas , so we can be more aware of and more involved with opportunities for economic growth .

We have taken some initial steps toward decentralization, with the addition of staff in the old former Boissevain Land Titles Office, with the Unified Family Court, with its operations in Brandon and its influence going beyond into northern Manitoba and the region surrounding The Pas. We have established a task force to try and come up with viable plans and alternatives for diversifying Government activities and operations into rural Manitoba.

We have keyed on a number of economic development activities, not the least of which is the sale of Manfor to Repap, the largest single industrial development activity that will ever take place in this province , with the investment of a billion dollars, the addition of some 400 new jobs, Mr. Speaker. All of these are an indication that we believe it is important to decentralize Government activities to acce ntuate opportunities for economic development and, therefore, jobs and more opportunities for people in rural and northern Manitoba.

There is a second step that must be taken but which can only proceed with the co-operation of all Members

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 in this House . I believe we need to establish an all Party committee to address some of the legal and constitutional aspects associated with northern and rural representation. There are four particular issues of concern that I feel such a committee would have to address. Firstly, such a committee should consider expanding or altering the Electoral Divi sion Boundaries Commission to ensure that rural and northern views are represented within that body.

As well , we need to look at the option of expanding the Legislature , perhaps to 60 seats , as a means of providing more Members to represent rural and northern communities while allowing the City of Winnipeg to retain its strength . We need to examine the issue of variance from the provincial average and see if we can do a better job of balancing the principle of every vote being equal against the realities of representing rural and vast northern constituents .

Lastly, we need to examine the issue of timing of the next redistribution to see if we can readdress the imbalance that has been created as an unfortunate side effect of a very valued process. It is important that we proceed to pass this Bill even despite our concerns, to ensure that the boundary settlement process remains above and beyond the reach of day-to-day politics that is part and parcel of this House.

However , we as a Legislature would be negligent if we simply pass this Act without taking any further action to meet the needs and concerns expressed through the public consultation process that accompanied the development of this Bill. I call upon all Members and all Parties of this Legislature to join with our caucus as we strive to find new and innovative solutions to the outstanding issues which remain . I certainly recommend this Bill to the House, Mr. Speaker . Thank you . Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, I rise on behalf of my Party to indicate our support for this piece of legislation, but also to put some comments on the record . I was asked by the previous Premier, Howard Pawley, to meet with him prior to the introduction of this legislation which brought about these present boundaries . I am sure the now Premier (Mr. Filmon) , then Leader of the Opposition , did exactly the same thing. •

(1500) At that particular moment, I expressed to the previous Premier my desire to see the House increased to 60 seats because I believed that was a way in which we could provide for both adequate representation from the City of Winnipeg, and also not decrease the number of seats that were given to rural Manitoba and to the North. At that point , the Premier indic ated that was not the will of the Government and that they wish to maintain the present number of seats in the Manitoba Legislature. Therefore, I agreed to the legislation as did all Members when it was introduced.

That legislation provided for differentials . It provided for a 25 percent differential 789 for the North and it provided for a 10 percent differential for the remainder of Manitoba outside of the Perimeter . Unfortunately , when the boundaries were presen ted, they did not reflect the 25 percent differential nor indeed the 10 percent differential. That caused my Party to have concerns, sufficient concerns that they made representations to the Boundaries Commission .

We indicated, at that time , that we were unhappy with the lack of attention that had been paid to both the 25 percent and th e 10 percen t differential. We also indicated our concern because place names of historic value had been lost . Constituency names like Fort Rouge had disappeared . A constituency name like Seven Oaks had disappeared .

We offered the suggestion that perhaps they could be double-barrelled , that the constituency of Osborne could have been Fort Rouge-Osborne , because it included almost all of historic Fort Rouge , and that Seven Oaks could have become Seven Oaks-Kildonan and in that way again an historic name was apt to be preserved . Unfortunately, because it is an independent Boundaries Commission , all we can do is give advice. We cannot dictate to them and that is as it should be.

If we are not to be accused of gerrymandering, if we are not to be accused of using undue political influence, then they need only listen to our advice and they need not accept our recommendations . We also had concerns, Mr. Speaker , because of what was happening in terms of the commission itself . That is why when a piece of legislation was intro duced in a Private Member 's Bill in this Chamber, broadening the numbers of the individuals who would make up the Boundaries Commission , I supported that legislation .

Unfortunately, it was not supported by the Government of the Day and , therefore , it did not pass . I have grave concerns when the Boundaries Commissioners all have their residence within the City of Winnipeg and , therefore, there is little or no input from those who live in the North or live in rural Manitoba .

We look forward to a committee which the Premier has indicated he wishes to establish , an all-Party commission which, before the next boundaries are developed , will create a number of new ideas and innovative procedures , one of which hopefully will be to broaden the number of individuals represented on the Boundaries Commission so that rural Manitoba and northern Manitoba will be represe nted by those commissioners . We also believe that we must look at how much dictation can be provided in the legislation to the Bounda ries Commission with regard to the differential.

I look forward to a lively discussion in that all-Party committee to establish rules which will maintain the absolute independence of the Boundaries Commission but at the same time create an understanding and an awareness that Manitoba is a strange and unique province in that so many of its citizenry live within one city. It is unlike any other province in the nation and, therefore, we must look to see if we cannot have legislation that would reflect that ambiguity, that strangeness within the Canadian family, but at the same

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 time not in any way violate any Charter provi sion s as, for example, has been challenged in the Province of British Columbia where the Suprem e Court has said that the British Columbia constituencies are not reflective of the principle of one vote-one individual, and that their differentiations are so widespread that it cannot even be considere d to be within an average. It cannot even be consid ered to be practicab le in a democratic society which represents representation by population . We are pleased to support this legislation.

We are looking forward to the challenge of establishing a new Boundaries Commission, to the challenge of establishing new legislation and, with deep hope , that next time the boundaries are developed there will be fairness and equity to all sections of Manitoba . Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): I too rise to support the Bill which is a reflection of the Independent Boundaries Commission Report of Manitoba , a system that has been put in place, as the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and Leader of the Oppos ition (Mrs.

Carstairs) have indicated , in the fourth occ asion in terms of this province, an indepe ndent syst em of establishing political boundaries that is impartial and unique in many of the western democratic systems where Governments today have some kind of Governm ent-appoin te d commission, usually thr ough personalities , and decide on the boundaries. Often they are, if not gerryma ndered, perceived to be gerrymandered , and I think that is very unfortu nate.

The tradition we have in this House , through three political Parties being in Government , of an impartial Boundaries Commission I think is a good one , and therefore it is con sistent with that principle that one rises to speak on this Bill. I have travelled through northern and rural Manitoba , Mr. Speaker, and I believe that there are some weakne sses in the commission's report . I believe the variation that was allowed for in the Bill should have been considered more in the deliberations of the indep end ent commi ssion .

I respect their rig ht to disagree with us, and they did , but I believe the variations that were placed in the Bill for northern Mani toba and for rural Manitoba were fair. Perhaps we should be looking at the words " shall" rather than " may." As an old person who was involv ed in a bit of negotiation before , I understand the difference in the meaning of those two words. I think that is important for us to look at over time to deal with the obviou s problems of represent ing a challenge, as representing a northern and remote seat , a rural seat versus an urban seat, which I represent.

It is easier to represen t an urban seat. I mean , you are in a sit uation , whether it is in Winnipeg or Brandon or Dauphin , but even Dauphin now has a rural comp onent. You are in a sit uation where your community is much closer together geographic ally and you are also closer to this Legislative Building, as has been indicated befor e.

I have travelled throughout the commun ities that now will be represe nted by one constituency in Rupertsland . 790 The vast nature of that constituency and the impossible, almost impo ssib le, task of travelling to communities that are not even on highways or are not even on normal transportation routes , some of which do not even have regular air service in any way, shape or form . I know whoever wins that seat in the future , it is going to be an absolutely horrendous job to represent that seat. I have travelled in seats in rural Manitoba that also will be much more difficult to represent and I respect that.

We certainly will look at any creative way of dealing with that reality in Manitoba , balancing the principle of population in vot ing but also balancing the other factor , and that is distance, in our deliberations in the future. I believe that it is important that we maintain the principle in this Chamber of passing the boundaries as they have been prepared by the indepen den t Boundaries Commission. *

(1510) I think it is imp ortant that in future deliberat ions, the Boundaries Commission-I believe there was a reso lution on the floor last year and I spoke to it about the representation on the committee looking at inst itutio nal positions from the North, institutiona l positions from rural Manitoba, to add to the institutional positions that are presently on that. So we have a very open mind , as we said last year when the resolution was before the Chamber from the Member for Minnedosa (Mr. Gilleshammer) .

We believe that this is the one Bill that all Parties support traditionally in this Chamber in a very statespersonlike way. I noticed that in the last time we had it, there was one speaker or two from our Party. Before in '69, there were a few others to talk about the local concerns , but the tradit ion has been one of principle in this Chamber for the last number of years . We will be voting with the principle of the Bill and, therefore , with the Bill in terms of the independent Boundaries Commission .

We are pleased it is going to be debated and decided upon on that basis , but we will be looking forward to the day that we can deal with the remote and northern problems and the real problems of representing rural ridings as well as the balance with population . We look forward to any kind of endeavour in that regard after the Bill is passed. Thank you very much , Mr. Speaker . Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to put a few comments on the record as a rural representative and a Member who has, for many years , felt very strongly about the concerns of representation .

I guess , first of all, we want to be very th ankful as a province and as a country that we have the right and the opportunity to have a democratic system of elect ed people who speak on behalf of those constituents . I know that is the basis from which we all work , and we want to continue to make that system work as effectively as possible . I just have to say, Mr. Speake r, that the comments of the Premie r (Mr. Filmon) very much reflect my desire . I am sure th at the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs) and the Leader of the Second Opposition

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 Party (Mr.

Doer), I hope, are very sincere, and I am sure they are, in their concern for the second step which has to be taken, that second step of an all-Party committee after this Bill is passed to deal with the difficulties of the remoteness and the rural communiti es being represented, the changes to the Boundaries Commission make-up, that we do have people who understand the boundaries of where the communities of trade, the hospital regions , the school division regions and the general make-up of our different communities, so that when a Member is travelling throughout their constituency that they can communicate as easily as possible in a common arena .

That, I think, is extremely important that we have someone on the commission who understands that very thing. Communities of trade , hospital districts , school divisions, there are many communities of common interest that MLAs can communicate with on a very, very good basis and that again is the basis for the make-up of the commission being representative of those areas. I think timing is another one, Mr. Speaker, and I say this very sincerely . There are many Members, my colleagues, and I am sure the Member for Churchill (Mr.

Cowan), sitting in the position that he is in, as many other rural and northern Members, that sometimes we tend to pass these Bills , it comes into place and we sit back and say, well, you know, it is done, we cannot do much about it. I think, as 57 legislators, we do have the opportunity to do something about it, and I do not want to see us sit back and say it is done, we have to wait 10 years. I would hope that the all-Party committee would deal very seriously with the time element because our life, as politicians, does not last that long.

We do not want to leave the situation that would develop in the province for the people following us that we leave a mark that is not one advantageous to representation, but in fact could take away that very important voice of rural and northern Manitoba. Let me say, it is my understanding of the original history of the province that we had a Senate, as we have in the Canadian system, to look after some of the regional problems that were developed. Now , Mr. Speaker, I say this very seriously .

I guess , if we were not able to correct it, then there would be many of us who are getting to our latter years in political life well, not quite that far, however-that we would be standing here advocating a Senate so that we could in fact take care of the imbalance of representation. Appreciating the difficulties we are having today with the Canadian Senate and getting some reform, I do not think we would want to go in that direction, but it is probably the last option.

So very seriously, it is a matter that our constituents, the Union of Municipalities and all the organizations , have been speaking out very loudly and clearly as to what they feel should be done . We cannot take lightly their recommendations. I am sure that all Members here do not take lightly the responsibility.

I am sure that any committee that would be established would work very aggressively to deal with the matter at hand , to make sure that we have a balance in this province, we have a fair voice in this province, not only for the City of Winnipeg but for rural and northern people who are equally as important, and 791 their say is equally import ant in the expenditures and to the policies of this province . Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I fully endorse the Bill plus the second step to get on with reform of the legislation for this province. Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to put som e comments on the record in discussion of this Bill, not so much to deal with the substance of the arguments which have been made so far because I agree with all of them. I agree with the Premie r (Mr. Filmon) and the Leader of the Oppos ition (Mrs . Carstairs) , the Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr. Doer) when they talk about fairness and equity for all Manitobans . I also agree that it is very important that these decisions be made by a group of individuals who represent all of Manitoba and not just the citizens of Winnipeg . Rather, Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to mourn the passing of the name Fort Rouge. I do so as likely the last representative of that constituency until another Boundaries Commission makes more recommendations about names. Let me remind my colleagues in this House that it was in the 1730s that the great Pierre La Verendrye who explored much of the mid cont inent of North America, who built on the north bank of the Assiniboine River and the forks of the Red, Fort Rouge. The name has resonance in the history of our province. Mr.

Speaker, many very distinguished Manitobans have had the pleasure of representing the people of Fort Rouge . It is in many ways the most unusual riding in all of the province because it has contained within it not only the historic confluence of the Red and the Assiniboine Rivers, but this very building itself. The history of democracy in our province , the exploration routes that were taken by the early explorers not only of this part of Canada, Mr. Speaker, but all of North America, has its roots in this very centre of what I consider to be our community. •

(1520) It is with deep regret that I mourn the passing of a great historic name , not only because I do not have a seat any more, Mr. Speaker-that is a political matter that will have to be debated and choices will be forthcoming-that is not the important issue . The important issue is that a name that is laden with meaning and of historical significance for all of the people of Manitoba has been lost. It is my duty , as the representative of the people of Fort Rouge, to put on the record the mourning of that passing. Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr.

Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to rise and put a few comments on the record on behalf of my constituents with regard to the new electoral boundarie s map which has a fairly large impact on the western side of the province. Numerous Members already have touched on the issue that representation is difficul t in a large riding that we have out in rural Manitoba . I can tell the Members that in the present riding that I represent, Virden, it is a little over 100 miles from

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 corner to corner. It will take me as long to dri ve across my riding as it will take many city Members to walk across the irs. Plus , the distan ce I am from my riding is not easy. In fact , it is nearly impossible for me to be home during the week to attend events or to go to meetings or meet with constituents for any reason so, therefore , we have suffere d a severe disadvantage because of distance and size. Clearly, what has happened in western Manitoba, just for the record, I would like to tell peo ple what the rural people are looking at out there.

In the 1970s, before the last electoral boundaries map chan ge, we had fo ur ridings down the western side of the province . They were Roblin, Birtle- Russell, Virden and Arthu r, righ t down the weste rn side of the provin ce int o t he southwest corn er. The last bounda ry change too k it down to three. That was about 10 years ago. At the present, we have Rob lin- Russell , Virden and Arth ur. This n ew map , if you look at the map , down the west side w e go down to two ridings , Robl in-Rus sell and Arthur-Vird en. We have gone from four to two ridings over a course of a litt le over 1 0 years.

My con sti tuent s a re not pleased with that becaus e the y have half the representation in here to voice the ir opinions on issues, and the ability to meet their Member or see their Member is g reatly decr eased by that size fact or, the size o f the rid ing factor . Althoug h I support the democratic process very strong ly, we have made a decision in here or the previo us Government passed

an Act. It set up a Boundar ies Commiss ion with representat ion, a non par tisan represe ntati on, and they came forward with recommendat ions , all legal and all up front, and we have to support it. The recommendations put on the recor d by the Premier (Mr. Filmon) with regard to looking at how we address the problems that this map has created, it is very essential they be done immediately and they b e done, as the Member for Arthur (Mr. Downey) said, sooner tha n 10 years . I think it is very important that it be done that way.

The purpose for my rising today is to exp ress concern for the decrease in representation that we are going to experie nce , concern that the Member for Concordia (Mr. Doe

r) mentioned , th at the differen ce betw een "ma y" and " shall" in terms of using the variance that was allowe d. In my opinion , they did not use it to the extent they could have to maintain the representation . There is no question that the City of Winnipeg deserve s this representation . If they shall stay at 30, 31 seats , rural Manitoba would like the opportunity to have the equa l represe ntatio n. To expand the House to 60 seats would be one way to accommo date tha t. I guess on my side of the House we are somewhat disappo inted the Private Members ' resolution that the Membe r f or Minnedosa (Mr.

Gilleshammer) brought forwa rd last year was not supp orted by the other side of the House. So I guess I am plea sed at this point to see that probab ly they changed their posi tion on that issue, by what the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carsta irs) has said in her comments today and the Member for Conco rdia (Mr. Doer) too . Maybe we are coming to a common position with regard to trying to have some representation that is 792 as fair and equal for rural Manitoba. I see the Member for St. James (Mr. Edwards) nodding his head no, saying no, we should not have representation equal for Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker : The Honourable Member for St. James, on a point of order. Mr. Paul Edwa rds (St. James): Mr. Speaker , the Minister has made reference to my nodd ing of my head in response to a comme nt that he has made. It in no way was reflective of disagreem ent with the fact that rural and northe rn Manitoba need bett er and more repr esentation. Mr. Speaker : Order, plea se. The point of orde r is? Mr. Edwards: It had to do specifically with how the Mem ber for Minnedosa (Mr. Gilleshamme

r) proposed to addres s that problem, that alone . Mr. Speaker: Order , pleas e. The Hono urable Member does not have a point of order. Mr. Findlay : That is interesting because the same end result occurred . You said no to it before and, if you are saying yes to it now , I would like you to get up when your opportun ity comes and put that on the record very clearly as to where you stand. (Mr. Deputy Speaker , William Chornopyski , in the Chair. ) There is no question that we want, in rural Manitoba, an equal opportunity to be heard on issues in this Legislature because it is a dem ocratic process.

We all believe in it. It is the strength of our society . The only reason for my rising today is not to object to the Bill that is in front of us, because that is not something we want to do, but to put on the record my desire to have my constituents' concerns recogn ized in what happens after this Bill is passed, in terms of the all Party committee, which will look at trying to have some variance to get the repres entation back to where we consider it to be fair and justified. Mr.

Deputy Speaker , I wanted to put those comments on the record because my constituents and many other rura l Manitobans came forward in great numbers in the some 65 representations, oral representations , and 66 written briefs and said precisely the same thing . We want to have maintained equal representation in rura l Manitoba , and however that can be achieved by our abili ties here and hereafter this Bill is passed , i s very important to them, and I hope that you will all look at it in the light of fairness and equality. Thank you very much . Mrs. Gwen Charles (Selkirk): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I too rise to speak on this Bill and speak in support of the Bill as it is introduced. I hope I will be able to put a new top ic on the table . As a Westerner-and I do consider myself a Westerner now-I moved out to Manitoba in 1968, and I have constantly and incessantly heard , and I am now certainly a believer of it, that the West continues to be ignored by the East, that being the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario .

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 We are, in this House and throughout Canada , particularly those classified as western provinces , discussing Senate reform and the need for equality in representation . As a person living outside the Perimeter Highway , I see the same attitude occurring within the Province of Manitoba that some people feel that all the power lies within the City of Winnipeg, and then there are the others. I am sure when you go beyond the lakes and become a Northerner that they then feel and realize that the power is not with the North.

It is with those to the south , and particularly those in the City of Winnipeg . As much as we speak on inequalities across the nation, I think we have forming in Manitoba inequalities of representation within the province itself. Even if it is a perceived inequality , it is a very serious matter, because I think we are as free and democratic as we believe ourselves to be, and that we are more likely to take and stand up for our responsibilities and our rights when we believe we have full ability to do so.

I really do fear that I am hearing out in rural Manitoba and northern Manitoba the sense of hopelessness of, what is the matter, the City of Winnipeg will decide it anyhow. I think that is being discussed here over and over again, the sense of helplessness of those in rural Manitoba and northern Manitoba, the sense that their vote does not count quite as much because it is so scattered around . It is very difficult for rural people to get to their Members of the Legislature.

When you look at some of the new ridings decided upon within this Act , this Bill that we are looking at today, you realize that some will be almost impossible to get to their Member of the Legislature. The expanse is just impossible. I see that quite obviously even in the small riding I have myself, the centre being the Town of Selkirk. The way the past boundaries have been made, the constituency of Gimli surrounds my constituency, and I have as many members from the constituency of Gimli come into my office as I do people from Selkirk .

That is understandable because the Town of Selkirk becomes their service centre. People from East Selkirk are not going to drive over to the Town of Teulon on a daily basis to meet their Member of their Legislature, and I appreciate that . I am very pleased to be able to help my neighbours, my fellow constituents, and my neighbouring towns with any of their problems. I am sure we all have that , we who represent particularly rural Manitoba, where we know that transportation problems exist and coming into town from time to time can be a big event on varying scales.

I can appreciate how much it is in the North, that this becomes a day they put aside to do their errands, and one may be to raise a problem of concern to their Member of the Legislature. I have no problems in dealing with these constituents, but I am sure that the person who they elected would be their preference to go to if that were possible. I certainly appreciate those people in this House who represent large rural ridings, who have several towns and service centres within it, if not numerous, and the difficulty in trying to get out to their people whom they represent.

I think that the sense of inequality does exist. 793 The Min ister of Agriculture (Mr. Findlay) asked us whether we have changed our mind in supporting the resolution put forw ard for the Member for Minnedo sa (Mr. Gilleshamm er) last year. The answer is definite ly we have not . We do not believe that numbers should be fixed within the Bill itself , the Act itself. We do not believe in fixing the numb ers of representation becaus e if this commission had taken in the numbers that they could have given, the 25 percent and 10 percen t differences , then they would have been able to create an equality there.

They were left out only in the manner that it was undertaken . Because of that, I myself have put forward a resolution last Session and again this Session, which I hear spoken to today, and I am very pleased to hear, that we have to change the representatives on the commission in some manner to represent the make-up of Manitoba. That, I hope, will include representation from the North and from rural Manitoba and perhaps may not be limited to three in number but perhaps go to five or whatever it would take to make true representation on the commission of what Manitoba is about.

I think we all have to deal with the perception of equality in this province because we all need to feel that we have as much right to our elected representative, we have as much right to a vote as anyone else does, whomever your neighbour may be. If we do not have a sense of equality, then it will be reflected somewhere along the line. I think we all support all Manitobans and their rights and their accessibility to being part of the democratic system. •

(1530) I look forward to hasty passing of this Bill. There is no need to hold it up in any way that I can see. I look forward to an all-Party committee where we can discuss these issues in more detail and come up with an agreed upon solution to the problems in Manitoba . Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I just want to make a few remarks. A lot of remarks have been made already in terms of the representation in the rural area , the difficulty that it is to serve in some of the rural areas versus the urban ridings.

I will not get into that . I would be remiss if I did not express some concern and disappointment in terms of the way the boundaries were cut up in this particular case. I know that all 57 Members here look at how it affects their riding. If anybody wants to take the time to look and see what they have done with the initial Emerson riding, I think I would probably have a lot of sympathy from a lot of the Members.

This is the second tim e I have had the privilege to be involved in redistribution , an important position , whatever , because I went through this last time, based on population , and I had no argument at that time. They extended my constituency dramatically, starting from the Perimeter all the way to the southeast corner in Middlebro, the southeast corner of Ontario and the United States. However, I have always enjoyed serving that area . It has been a real challenge. What has happened, the people themselves sort of have

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 developed the understandin g of how they fit into the constituency plan . What they have done in this particular drawing, if anybody wants to go and have a look, they have cut it out four different ways . Unfortunately , the quota of the population figure in my constituency did not really fall, but it was a matter of how they started drawing.

Then they came finally to the southeast corne r and they used it as a jigsaw puzzle to sort of make things fit because they took the bottom portion and left that as the Emerson riding and moved the majority of the population across Highway 75 to the west. Then they took out anoth er chunk of it, the St. Pierre-Otte rburne area, and moved that into the Morris riding . Then they took two more communities and threw that into the new riding of Steinbach. Then they took the north end of my constituency and threw that into the La Verendrye riding.

Now, if anybody really wants to, look at what a hodgepodge they created in my constituency. I have to be a little careful that I do not get a little emotional about this thing because you develop a relationship within your constituency over a period of 12 years . Now that does not assure me that next time I would be the representative , but most certainly the thinking and the feeling within the constituency , people take certain pride in that. All of a sudden, you massacre the thing in four different ways, and I just want to express that kind of disappointment.

I think I would support any activity in terms that we review how the process is being done . Obviously , nothing will change in this particular time and the next one is 10 years from now or whenever. I want to express that kind of a concern that we develop a better system of doing this because I think what has happened in some cases-you know, we are all a little selfish. Some of the Members , obviously , their ridings have maybe enhanced their potential for re-election. Be that as it may, and I do not fault them for saying , well , it is not that bad .

In my particular case, I feel I have a genuine concern that I wanted to express here today . I would support anything that we look at for the future in doing it in a better way. I just once again ask the Members, if you have concerns whether the system is right , look at the figures in my constituency , Emerson constituency, over the last ten years, the population figures, and then look at what they have done with my riding. Mr. Deputy Speaker , there must be a better way. I felt I would be remiss if I did not express my concerns here today. Thank you. Mr. Harold Gilleshammer (Minnedosa): Mr.

Deputy Speaker , I appreciate the opportunity to add my thoughts to this debate today . I think there are two issues that I would like to deal with. One is the process that has taken place regarding boundaries revision . While I do not agree with the end result, I think I can agree with other Memb ers who say we must support tha t process and that we cann ot tamper with that at this late date. I think , on that basis, I will certainly be voting in favour of this legis lation.

I think there is general agreement that the process has to be maintained . 794 Secondly , I am very interested in the new-found recognition of the merits of a resolution I introdu ced last year. I think it is important that we revisit some of those things. I am pleased to see the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs) and the Leader of the Second Party embracing some of those ideas . Previous speakers have tal ked abou t the lack of rural representation that this new legislatio n is going to bring about. I think it is importa nt th at we address that and address that fairly quickly.

The concept of an all-Party committee seems to have garne red some support, and it would be the pro per place to deal with that. I would point out that this sort of situat ion is not uniq ue, that the concept of balancing the one person one vote with regional representation has been dealt with in the United States . Two hundred years ago, when the makers of the American Constitution met, the manner in which they chose to deal with the large state small state problem was a compromise, and that was the creation of an American Senate, where all state s had equal representation.

I am not suggesting, as perhaps the previous speaker did , that is a solution here. I am making the point that it is not a unique case, that other legislators, other framers of constitutions have had to deal with that problem, and have found the creat ive solutions that the Leader of the NOP (Mr. Doer) suggested . Within Canada, there have been examples where regional representation was a concern and solutions were found there . I think we in Manitoba can find a made-in-Manitoba solution to this dilemma we are facing .

Other speakers have mentioned the difficulty in representing a rural riding as opposed to an urban riding . I would certainly echo that, that the distance from this seat of Government makes it a little more difficult to represent the people in the rural part of Manitoba, and most certainly in northern Manitoba . I think we have to address that issue , and by increasing the size of the House to 60, by changing some of the other factors involved with redistr ibution , I think we can maintain that representation in the rural areas. I am only sorry that this had not happened a couple of years previous to this.

I think it is a problem that perhaps was perceived too late to do anything about it. I am very heartened by the comments that I have heard from both Opposition Parties and Members of my Party, that they want to form this all-Party committee and deal with this issue as soon as possible. I would suggest that the use of that variance is probably the manner in which that can be done . Certainly , the one person-one vote idea is very basic to democ racy. Nobody can argue any diffe rently.

The variance and the use of that variance would allow the rural and northern areas to have that repres entation they so dearly deserve and want. I can tell you that my experience, after introducing this resolution in the House last year, was that people from all over Manitoba, including from the City of Winnipeg , phoned and wrote letters of support, that the Union of Manitoba Municipalities passed a resolution to that effect.

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 I hear the support now coming from the other two Parties, and I would hope that this all-Party committee can be called very soon and that the areas that have been identified can be dealt with, and that we do not have to wait 10 years to rectify what many peopl e in rural and northern Manitoba see as a tremendous injustice .

Many of them have gotten used to being able to locate their Member and there is going to be a tremendous amount of confusion with new boundaries, particularly in the southeastern part of the province where the map has been carved up in a rather disconcerting way, in a manner in whic h I think natural trading areas, school divisions, the historical boundaries have been done away with. * (1540) (Mr.

Speaker in the Chair.) I would hope that we can deal with that in this committee , that we can bring recommendatio ns forward in a unanimous way and bring that legislation before the House in the next few months or the next year, and that we do not have to wait 10 years to try and rectify this. I would simply close by again saying that I am pleased that there is the recognition of the merits in tha t resolution, and I would hope that all Members can co operate.

I realize that co-operation is not always easi ly attained in this Chamber, but it seems from the comments that have been made by the other Parties that we are on the verge of that co-operation and tha t we can bring this legislation forward and remedy this problem . Thank you, Mr. Speaker , for this opportunity of putting these thoughts on the record . Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, my contribution to this Bill will not be lengt hy but let me indicate that I too rise to express some concerns, I suppose in retrospect, looking and watch ing closely what has happened over the past two or three months, given the legislation that has been on the books , given the intentions, and I say the well-meaning intentions of the former Government, indeed ourselves in Opposition , indeed the MLA for River Heig hts, the now Leader of the Official Oppos ition (Mrs . Carsta irs), as we have gone through this exercise over a period of not months but , I would say, years . Mr.

Speaker , one can always learn from the activities and I suppose what I have learned through this exercise is that best intentions captured by those that write laws, which we debate and ultimately pass or reject , still at times tend to be weak . When I mak e that statement, I reflect specifically on the area of varian ce. I know under the old legisl ation there were variance levels of 25 percen t. At the time I was one , I guess, who thought that there was probably some good common sense , und ersta nding the principle of representation by popul ation that there should be some narrowing of those limit s.

I know that was the basis on which the former Government, when it brough t forward its legislation , I believe in 1987 -or was it '86. '87 I think-conceived and drafted its new legislation . 795 But, Mr. Speaker, I think what those of us forgot , even myself when I indicated, when I spoke to that Bill , that when one looked at the 10 lowest ranking in terms of population , constituencies through the province , they seem to gravitate into a regional area. I sensed tha t maybe there was some wisdom to narrow that varianc e by some degree . But , Mr.

Speaker , I guess what I forgo t to study, and I think my colleague , the MLA for Pemb ina (Mr. Orchard), will probably provide in some greate r detail , is that there had been over many decades a reflec tion of the common desire of the legislators in the Province of Manitoba to allow certain degrees of variation and that to ratchet that back violently from 25 percent to 10 percent caused an incredible slippage in the representation of particularly rural seats. Now, Mr.

Spea ker, I guess what I have learned through it, that moderat ion is still the best course of action because that ratcheting back of the loss of rural representati on far outstripped the number of citizens , the change in the number of citizens living in rural Manitoba versus the City of Winnipeg over the last numbers of years . Again, I will defer to my colleague , the Minist er of Health (Mr. Orchard) , to give greater clarity to that statement. Mr. Speaker, if we were beginning the process all over again , I can indicate I, as one Memb er, would take a much different approach to the process .

I sense what has happened here now, once we look at the vari ation factor and brought it from 25 percent to 10 percent , that it has allowed no sensitivity. Munic ipal boundaries as indicated by my colleague , the MLA for Minn edosa (Mr. Gilleshammer), have been horribly violated as was requested that not be done by the Union of Manitob a Municipalities . Those of us who understand what it means to cut across one municipality, those of us who have rural sea ts , understand the diff iculty that causes .

You can understand now where we have many seats, where they are cutting across in my riding , my existing riding , or under the terms of the next Morris riding , it cuts across, I th ink, ab out six or eight mun icipality bou ndarie s. Mr.

Speaker, I guess it is not for me to call into question the logic put into place by the people drawing the borders but, my good ness, I have to, because somebody was totally out of understanding of what is req uired as a common-sense approach to the drawing of these borders when one takes into account municipal boundaries and school boundaries, if no other reason , those two factors , let alone physical barrie rs that obviously are importan t also. Mr. Speaker , I have to stand and put that concern on the reco rd becaus e some thing has gone amok. I say then that I support the all-Part y committee.

It is a good idea. I want to accept , sincere ly, the comments made by Members of the Opposition Parties who say that they will come forw ard to that comm ittee with the since rest of intents , that they will look at not a 10-ye ar time frame but one that is short er than that , tha t they will look at varianc e, taking into acco unt the history and the pure common sense of try ing to service our rural areas, that they will take int o accou nt the make up of the comm issioner s. those who sit in place and make these judgments outside of politics, and that they

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 will take into account the 60 seat versus 57, although to me that is a secondary issue to the other two. Mr. Speaker, I guess I will sit here, ultimately, once a new Bill comes forward , sit in judgment as to how the all-Party committee, given the set of circumstances now where we have minority Government , sits and tries to reflect and tries to right some of the obvious misdoings .

I say that not from bad intentions of the people who, ultimately, brought into place maps that I think could be better , but indeed in a sense of common sense of how our rural areas should be better reflected in standing, and indeed better reflected as to how the boundaries should exist around them . I wish the all-Party committee well because I will be sitting in the House judging its activities in view of these three or four areas. I really believe that rural Manitoba has suffered badly as a result of the Bill that is being introduced today . Mr.

William Chornopyski (Burrows): I listened to most of the speakers here today speaking on this Bill dealing with the Boundaries Commission. I was convinced that perhaps I should stand up and make a few remarks and put them on record . I say that because if somebody should check Hansard, I want them to see that the results of problems created in this last redistribution in the City of Winnipeg, and I can appreciate that the rural problems are somewhat different than those that are in the City of Winnipeg, but nonetheless there are problems . I want to say, Mr.

Speaker, that I have lived in my riding , I think it is somewhere near 42 years. That riding has remained the same all those years as far as I can remember or as far back as I can remember . Basically, it remained the same because it had what may be considered natural boundaries, and I refer to specifically the boundary to the south of the riding. It was natural because it was a railway yard, and they dare not cross the railway yard because they would cross into Logan, and if they went far enough they would cross into Ellice . In this case, they did exactly that.

They have totally overlooked the natural boundary that existed there for all these years and they crossed Logan riding, right into Ellice riding. They have gone as far as Notre Dame Avenue. •

(1550) I am not complaining because the population is probably different and the community certainly is probably somewhat different, but I am complaining about this redistribution, Mr. Speaker. While they crossed the track and went into Logan and Ellice ridings , they took a chunk out of the old Burrows constituency and placed it into St. Johns, for whatever reason. I studied that map and I, for the life of me, could not understand why they would want to change that when it was actually unnecessary , it was very unnecessary.

I know the personnel who served on this commission are very high-profile people, but they obviously looked at numbers instead of boundaries . Mr. Speaker, I want to place this on record . I am very happy that there is going to be this three-Party 796 committee, and I am sure that they are going to look at Hansard and they are going to study what the speakers said on this Bill, how they felt about this particular Bill and how they felt about the redistribution and the boundaries of these ridings . It is for that reason that I want to put this on record.

There are other problems I think in the North End north of Burrows constituency . The y have totally eliminated one riding and I guess it is for that reason that they had to cut into Burrows, take a chunk of Burrows and put it into St. Johns . When they eliminated Seven Oaks riding, for example, they had to do something with that riding, so they have now made it St . Johns, totally eliminating one riding, totally disregarding the natural boundaries that existed there for many, many years . I just cannot see any purpose for it or any kind of reasoning for it. I just wanted to place that on record, Mr.

Speaker, as I said before and I am repeating myself, so that these people who are going to serve on this three-Party committee reviewing the boundaries, that will hopefully help them to see that there are also problems in the city as well as in rural Manitoba . Thank you very much . Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, I will not be long on this. I think the remarks that have been put on the record already with respect to this legislation echo in many respects the sentiments that I had the opportunity to share with the Electoral Boundaries Commission when it appeared in Thompson back in the summer. Mr.

Speaker, the fact is that the constituency I represent is having its boundaries changed substantially, effectively tripling the area that the Flin Flon constituency would represent when this legislation is finally proclaimed . I do not think I have to tell Members of this House how difficult it is to serve a rural and particularly a rural northern riding. In my constituency, there are communities that are only accessible by air at certain times of the year. Of course, people in this Chamber will recognize that air transportation is, like few other forms of transportation, dependent upon the weather.

Northern representatives from time to time have been weathered out and weathered in. On top of that, the kinds of communications that people normally associate with fulfilling the responsibilities of a Member of the Legislative Assembly are ultimately more difficult to achieve in northern and rural areas. In my constituency, there is at present no single vehicle for sharing information among the communities. Unlike the City of Winnipeg, which has a paper which is shared information among many constituencies , there is no vehicle for the MLA or other elected officials to share information among communities.

In many communities, there is no newspaper. In most communities, there is no radio station and certainly no television station. In many communities, the normal communication links which people associate with the business of being a Member of the Assembly are not in existence. I have communities in my constituency where the majority of the residents do not even have telephones.

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 I made this case to the Electoral Boundaries Commission, as did other northern MLAs, other New Democrats in the North. We pleaded the case for maintaining the existing differential with respect to population, representatio _n by population. I am still of the bel ief that the Charte r of Rights would not have been violated by following the 25 percent differentiation rule. I disagreed with the Chair of the commission when he proposed that as a principle upon which to base his ruling.

However, in the final analysis , although I regret the changes and I think they are not certa inly from my perspective going to serve the interests of my constituents as well as I wish they would, we have to respect the independence of the commission, and we certainly want to avoid the perception even that boundaries, political boundaries , are going to be manipulated by the Legislative Assembly. That clearly would not be an acceptable alternative .

So although we in the New Democratic Party and I as an MLA attempted to influence the decision of the commission to impose upon them at least our perception of the difficult ies that were being imposed upon Northerners and their representatives by these changes, we do not want to undermine for all intents and purposes the best, most impartial process that we have across the country . But I can assure you that we will continue through legitimate means to attempt to address what we see as some shortcomings in the proposal.

With that, I want to say that on behalf of my constituents, we and their representatives will deal with the new boundaries as best they can , continue to serve the people of northern Manitoba to the best of their ability. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, I want to make a number of comments, because I think that genuinely this is one of the most important pieces of legislation that we will be dealing with this Session, because this piece of legislation sets the tone of Government for the next decade, for certain, and possibly for a lot greater period of time than that, than simply the next decade. *

(1600) Many people in this Chamber, in all three political Parties , have expressed many similar concerns over this legislation . I say that I will be supporting this legislation because that is as is mandated by the Electoral Boundaries Commission that after reporting at the next Session this legislation must be brought in. I am bound to support that legislation, but I want to point out to my honourable friends some areas in which I am very uncomfortable with this legislation. I liked when the previous speaker, the Member for Flin Flon (Mr.

Storie), made these points at the Electoral Boundaries Review Commission meeting at Port age la Prairie. I want to share them with my honourable friends in the House and my honourable colleagues in the two Opposition Parties. This is a very sens iti ve iss ue because, any time you change elector al bou ndaries, 797 you change constituent ownership with what they have become comfortable with. That, in a democracy, is not done easily. I want to assure you that in the 12 years that I have been here , and boundary changes have happened, that there have been very unhappy indi viduals because of those boundary changes.

Some of the reasons have been brought to the record by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and other s, and the Member for Burrows (Mr. Chornopyski) , because people become accustome d to a constituency name and a representative and a natural constituency based on trading patterns, visiting patterns, catchment are as for school or hos pital. Those things become comfortable boundaries that are often not reflected in the new boundaries when they are presented in the House , so that it is a very sensitive area. I want to share with you the thoughts of the R.M. of Louise, which is in my constituency.

In 1979, the R.M . of Louise was part of the Rock Lake constituency which , because of reorganization, was absorbed into several other constituencies. So the R.M. of Louise became ' an add-on to Pembina constituency. They felt genuinely disenfranchised. Now, after some 10 years and , I believe, three elections that they have been part of Pembina constituency, they are now again going to feel disenfranchised becaus e they are, once again, shorn away from Pembina constituency and become part of Turtle Mountain constituency. In rural Manitoba, there is an ownership in constituency .

I think that is what the Member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) was trying to indicate to the House. I want to tell my honourable friends, particu larly some of our new colleagues in the Legislature, that there is a growing feeling of alienation in rural Manitoba and northern Manitoba as a result of constantly seeing the City of Winnipeg receive greater numbers of representation in this House. That is not an animosity towards the entity of Winnipeg. It is a natural feeling tha t is there once you go beyond the Perimeter Highway.

It is reinforced when pieces of legislation come in, taking seats from rural and northern Manitoba and putting them in the City of Winnipeg. It is not an animosity , it is a feeling of alienation. All of us can share in that because, I think , there is not a Member in this House who has not spoken negatively against Ottawa on the national context, that it is controlled by Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa.

That feeling of western alienation that we all have experienced as expressed by our constituents , that feeling is part and parcel of rural and northern Manitoba feelings , as they feel disenfranchis ed by consecutive reorganizations of the constituenc y boundaries in this province. Mr. Speaker, what makes it even more imp ortant to reflect in a very thoughtful way on what we are doing here is that there has not been the significant shif t in population that has been alluded to.

In the 1969 boundary reorganization, based on the 1966 census, 54 percent of the general population lived in Winnipeg and 46 percent outside . That today has chang ed to 56 percent in Winnipeg, 44 percent in the rest of Manitoba , only a 2 percent chan ge in the population from rural

Wednesday, June 21, 1989 and northern Manitoba to Winnipeg. Yet, in that same period of time we have seen rural Manitoba in 1969 represented by 30 seats , now going down to 26 seats , a loss of some 15 percent of the seats , for a shift of 2 percent in the population , and that causes the kind of alienation. Mr. Speaker, the reason it happened is that the legislation that we acceded to in 1983 or'84 or'85, I cannot give the exact year, put rural Manitoba on a 10 percent variance in population and hence we lost-it was 1987, I am informed by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) .

That is the reason why we have a further disenfra nchise when there has been no population shift from the 1976 census to the 1986 census on which the reorgan izations have been based . The population breakout is exactly the same, '76 to '86, but we have changed the rules under which it operates . That was clearly pointed out to myself when I presented at the Boundaries Commission Hearing in Portage la Prairie . Other jurisdictions have come to grips with this. The federal Government has come to grips with it, and Prince Edward Island will have four federal seats forever.

That is not reflective of population because many seat s in other provinces of Canada, one single seat has the entire population equivalent of Prince Edward Island . Other jurisdictions have said , including the federal Government , that we can reflect in this Legislature a common-sense approach to representation . I believe the opportunity is there for us to do that as well. I want to explain that later on because , Mr. Speaker , a number of things come up in rural cons titu encies and northern constituencies that do not affect an urban constituency and it involves just simple ability to represent.

No urban representative in this Legislature has to deal with issues in Agriculture . That is our major business in rural Manitoba, and we have all sorts of constituents' problems that emanate from Agriculture . Similarly , with Natural Resources , that is a majo r player of Government in rural constituencies and in northern constitue ncies. In Highways , similarly , there are problems that individual MLAs deal with.

In municipal Government, I want to share with my honourable friends who are new to the Legislature, in the Pembina constituency as it is now constituted , I deal with six municipal councils , six reeves and over 30 coun cill ors . At the same time, I deal with five elected mayors and councillors, and over 25 town councillors in my constituency . Many of you in the City of Winnipeg deal probably with one and at most two city councillors who handle the street problems , business problems , natural resource equivalent problems , and certainly municipal Government problems .

So the issue of time consumption and the workload is certainly different. I am not down playing the workload tha t urban MLAs in the City of Winnipeg do. You do many things that we do not have to deal with as well , but those basic issues I think have to be repeated for the record because I have been highly

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-2-24
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 2nd hansardpdf 24.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	2ba7f2b78057c7547e1f6ff6a812d2e9ccd4b07e

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