Manitoba Hansard — 10 April 1985 (Sitting 24, 32nd Legislature, 4th Session)

32-4-24

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 10 April, 1985. rime - 2:00 p.m. JPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. 'tR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presenting Petitions . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAK ER : The Ho nourab le Memb er for Concordia. �R. P. FOX: Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the first report of the Commit tee on Rules of the House. r.tR. CLERK, W.

Remnant: Your Committee met on Thursday, November 8, 198 4 at 10:00 a.m.; Thursday, December 13 , 19 84 at 10 :00 a.m.; Monday, January 21, 198 5 at 10 :00 a.m.; Tuesday, February 12, 198 5 at 10:00 a.m.; Tuesday, February 26, 19 85 at 10 :00 a.m.; Monday, March 18, 19 85 at 10:00 a.m.; and Tuesday, April 9, 19 85 in Room 255, Legislative Building to consider matters referred. On November 8, your Commit tee elected Mr. Mercier to replace Mr. Sherman, who had resigned from the House. On December 13 , your Committee accepted the resignations of Hon. Mr. Penner and Mr.

Fox as Members of the Commit tee and elected Hon. Mr. Storie and Mr. Eyler to replace them. On January 21 , your Committee accepted the resignations of Hon. Mr. Storie and Mr. Eyler as Members of the Committee and elected Hon. Mr. Penner and Mr. Fox to replace them. On February 12, your Commit tee accepted the resignation of Hon. Mr. Penner as a Member of the Committ ee and elected Hon. Mr. Mackling to replace him. Your Comm ittee consid ered the question of the 'nterpretation of Rule 46 (no Member to speak twice) Jnd recommends that no change be made to the Rule.

Your Commit tee considered the use of high-powered telephoto lenses in the Press Gallery and recommends that no restrictions be im posed on their use. Your Comm ittee recommends that during the summer of 198 5 the Cler k's Office review the Rules of the House to identify those provisions which require amendments to overcome inconsistencies and other deficiencies and, if time permits, to identify procedural developments in other jurisdictions which could be adopted in Manitoba.

Your Com mittee also considered the provision of agendas and supporting material to the News Media and recommends that a proposed agenda be circulated with the not ice of meet ing and that supporting background material be distri buted to the News Media at meetings as each topic is reached on the agenda. Your Commi ttee recommends that when it is again necessary to reprint the Rules of the House, a full examination be made of the various different processes by which this may be done.

Your Com mittee reviewed the Rules anq Authorities on which previous Speakers' Rulings were based for 724 the period of October 24, 1954 to February 27, 1962 and recommends that no changes be made to the Rules and that an ad-hoc sub-committee consisting of the Government House Leader, the Opposition House Leader and the Clerk of the House review the remaining Rulings and advise your Committee of any changes required or any problems encountered.

Your Committee considered the correction of printing errors in the annual statutes (bound Volumes) and recommends that the corr ections be made by incorporation of the appropriate provision in The Statute Law Amendment Act with a notation in the

preamble that the amendments are necessary due to printing errors in the annual statutes. Your Committee recommends that the Clerk's Office include a Legislation Progress Chart In the Votes and Proceedings on a weekly basis as soon as it is feasible to set up a word processing program to do this. Your Comm ittee conside red the matter of a guaranteed minimum debating time for constitutional matters and recommends that the consideration of this matter be deferred. Your Comm ittee considered a no smoking policy to apply to Committee meetings and recommends the following:

a) THAT no smoking be permitted at any meeting of a Committee of the Whole House, including the Committee of Supply and the Committee of Ways and Means, or at any meeting of a Stand ing or Special Comm ittee of the Assembly;

b) THAT the policy set out in clause (

a) apply with equal effect to Members of the Assembly, members of the general public, representatives of the news media and House officers and staff present at meetings described in clause (a); and

c) THAT notwithstanding clauses (

a) and (

b) where a Standing or Special Committee is meeting outside the Legislative Building any such Committee may decide whether or not to permit smoking at its meetings. Your Committee considered changes to practices In Private Members' Hour and recommends the following:

a) THAT the following amendments to the Rules respecting the consideration of business In the Private Members' Hour continue in effect on a trial basis for the duration of the current session of the Legislative Assembly;

b) TH AT present sub-rules 3(4) and (5 ) be repealed and the following substituted therefor:

(4) At 5:30 o'clock p.m. on Wednesday and at 12 :30 o'clock· p.m. on Fridays, the Speaker shall adjourn the House without question put. {5) When the House is adjourned on Friday at 12:30 o'clock p.m., it shall stand adjourned unless otherwise ordered until the following Mo nday afternoon.

c) THAT present sub-rule 19(2) be repealed and the following substituted therefor: T O M

Wednesday, 10 April, 1985

(2) The order of busi ness for consideration by the House, day by day, after the daily routine shall be as follows: Government Business (M onday through Friday) Orders for Returns and Add resses for Papers Committee of the Whole House, for consideration of Bills Report Stage, Bills reported from Committees Government Bills -Third Readings, Second Readings Government Motions Private Members' Business 4: 30 to 5:30 p.m. on each Monda y, Tuesd ay, Wednesday and Thursday Monday Priv ate Members' Resolutions Private Bills Public Bills by Priv ate Members Orders for Return, Add resses for Papers, referred for debate Tuesday Priv ate Bills Public Bills by Private Members Priv ate Members' Resolutions Orders for Return, Add resses for Papers, referred for debate Wednesday Orders for Return, Add resses for Papers, referred for debate Private Members' Resolutions Private Bills Public Bills by Priv ate Members Thursday Public Bills by Priv ate Members Private Bills Priv ate Members' Resolutions Orders for Return, Add resses for Papers, referred for debate

d) THAT the Rules of the House be amended by adding the following new Rule immediately after Rule 22: Time Limit on debate 22.1( 1) The total time allowed for the consideration of any Private Members' Res olution and any amendment thereto shall not exceed three hours. Termination of debate

(2) When the time allowed by sub-rule (1) has expired the Speaker shall terminate debate on the item being considered.

e) THAT present sub-rule 33(3) be repealed and the following substituted therefor:

(3) Notwithstand in g sub-rules ( 1) and (2), speeches during Private Members' Hour or during debate on a private member's order called by the Government pursuant to sub-rule 20(2) shall be limited to fifteen minutes. Your Com mittee has agreed to the follo win g permanent changes to the Rules and recommends them to the House to be effective on concurrence: Procedure in unprovide d cases 725 1.

TH AT sub-rule 1(2) be repealed and the following substitu ted therefor: 1(2) In all cases not provided for in these Rules, by sessional or other orders or by the usages and customs of the Assembly, the usages and customs of the House of Commons of Canada as in force at the time shall be followed so far as they may be applicable to the Assembly. Limitations on extension 2. THAT sub-rule 10 (5) be repealed and the following substituted therefor: 10 (5) - When pursuant to sub-rule (4) the Speaker has directed that the division bells continue to ring beyond fifteen minutes: (

a) the time for the division bells to be turned off once set shall not be altered; (

b) no further extension shall be granted in respect of that division; and (

c) no such extension shall exceed twenty four hours. Of Government Orders 3. THAT sub-rule 20(2) be repealed and the following substituted therefor: 20( 2) - When government bu siness has precedence, the government orders and private members' orders may be called In such sequence as the government determines. Business not to stand over 4.

THAT sub-rule 21 (4 ) be repealed and the following substituted therefor: 21 (4) -Any debate on a motion made under sub rule 27(1) is terminated when the House adjourns on the day of the debate and shall not be continued or resumed at the next or any subsequent sitting of the House. Adjournment of debate 5. THA T the following new Rule be added immediately after Rule 26: 26.1(1) When a motion to go into Committee of Ways and Means or Committee of Supply has been pr oposed a member may raise a grievance respecting a matter which is of concern to the member or to the member's constituenc y.

Member to speak once only on grievance

(2) A member may not speak to a grievance on more than one occasion during a session of the Assembly. Debate terminated same day.

(3) Any debate pursuant to this Rule is terminated when the House adjourns on the day of the debate and shall not be continued or resumed at the next or any subsequent sitting of the House. Speeches during Private Members' Hour 6. THA T sub-rule 33(3) be repealed and the following substituted therefor: 33(3) - Notwithstanding sub-rules (

I) and (2), speeches during the Private Members' Hour or during debate on a private member's order called by the government pursuant to sub-rule 20(2) shall be limited to twenty minutes. Formal Vote in Committee 7. THAT Rule 65 be amended by adding thereto immediately after sub-rule 7 thereof the following new sub-rules: (7.1) - vVhere, immediately following the taking of a voic-e-vote, two members demand that a formal

w.ctnesd•y, 10 April, 1915 vote be taken, the members shall be called in, both sections of the Committee of Supply shall meet together and a count-out vote shall be taken. Both sections of the Comm ittee of Supply to meet (7.2) - For the pur poses of taking a count-out vote pursuant to sub-rule (7. 1) both sections of the Committ ee of Supply may meet together in or outside the Cham ber.

Voting to be completed (7 .3) - Where, pursuant to sub-rule (7 .1 ), a formal vote has been commenced before 10:00 o'clock p.m. but has not been completed by that hour , notwithstanding sub-rule (9), the conduct of that vote shall not be interrup ted and shall be continued until it is completed whether or not th ose proceed ings continue after 10 :00 o'clock p.m. "Count-out" vote (7.4) - For the pur poses of sub-rules (7. 1) , (7.2) and (7.3) "count-out" vote means the counting aloud by the Clerk of Committee of the members rising to vote for and against the question when a formal vote has been demanded. 8.

THAT paragraph 65(9)(a.1) be repealed and the following substituted therefor: (a. 1) - Where two mem bers demand that a formal vote be taken, the Chairman or Deputy Chairman of the Committees shall defer the vote on the motion until the next sitting of the Commit tee of Supply in the Chambe r. Proceed ings in Commi ttees 9. THAT Rule 68 be repealed. Voting in Commit tees 10 .

THAT the following new Rule be added imme diately after Rule 73. 1: 73.2 All questions before a Committee shall be decided by a majority of votes excluding the vote of the Chairman of the Commit tee and when the votes on a question are equal the Chairman shall cast a deciding vote. 11 . THAT Rule 81 be repealed and the following . substituted therefor: Filing of Petitions 81(1) - Any member wishing to present a petition shall file the petition with the Clerk at least twenty four hours before presenting it to the House. Note : A person wishin g ot ha ve a pet ition presented must do so through a mem ber.

Time for presentation

(2) A member presenting a petition shall do so from his place in the House during routine proceed ings when the Speaker calls for th e presenting of peti tions on any day during the Session. · Debate prohibited

(3) On the presentation of a pe tition, no deb ate shall be allo wed on or in relation thereto. Member answerable (4 ) The member pres enting a pet ition is answerable that it does not contain any impertinent or improper matter. Member's endorsement

(5) The mem ber pres enting a pet itio n shall endorse his signature thereon. Form

(6) Petitions shall be in writing and may be in the form set out in Appendix "A" and, subject to sub rule (7), shall be signed by each of the petitioners. 726 Signatur es where more than 3 petitioners

(7) Where there are more than three petitioners, the signatures of at least three of the petitioners on the page on which the prayer or part of the prayer of the petition appears is sufficient execution of the petition. Petition for expenditure not permissible

(8) No petition shall be received if it prays for any expenditure, grant or charge on the public re venue, whether payable out of the Consolidated Fund or out of moneys to be provided by the Assembly. Receiving petitions

(9) On the day following the presentation of a petition, if in the opinion of the Speaker it conforms with the practices and privileges of the House and compl ies with the Rules, the Clerk shall lay the pet ition upon the Table and the petition shall then be deemed to have been read and received and may be read aloud in the House if requir ed by the House; but, if in the opinion of the Speaker the petition does not confirm with the practices and privile ges of the House and does not comply with the Ru les, he shall report that fact to the House.

Where petition not received (10 ) Where the Speaker reports th at, in his opinion, a petition contains matters in breach of the practices and privi leges of the House or does not comply with the Rules, the petition shall not be received except upon res olution of the House. No debate on petition . ( 11 ) On the receiv ing of a petition or on a motion to receive a petition under sub-rule ( 10), no debate shall be allowed on or in relation thereto except if it complains of some personal grievance requiring an immedia te remedy, the matter contained therein may be brought into immediate discussion. 12.

THAT Rules 82 to 89 inclusive be repealed and the following substituted therefor: Application of

Chapter 82 Except where a provision of

Chapter XIV is inconsistent with a provision in this Chapter, this

Chapter applies to all Bills, whether Public or Private. Introduction of Bills 83 Every Bill shall be introducd upon motion for leave specifying the title of the Bill. Bills validating letters patent, by_:laws and agreements 84 Wh ere a bill for val id ating, ratifying or confirming any letters patent, by-law or agreement is presented to the House, a certified copy of the letters patent, by-law or agreement shall be attached to it.

First read ing not debatable 85 Where a Bill is introduc ed by a member upon motion for leave, the mover of the motion may give such explanation as will enable the Hous e to understand the purport of the Bill, but the question "that this Bill be now read a first time" shall be decided without amend ment or debate. Second read ing after printing 86( 1) Un less otherwise specially ordered or allo wed by the House, each Bill shall be printed and di stri buted in the Hous e before second read ing. Bills to be marked "Printed" on Orders

(2) No Bill shall be read the second time un less it has been printed and distrib uted to the members

Wednesday, 10 April, 1985 at least two days previously , and has been subsequently marked "P rinted" on the Orders of the Day, signifying that it has been printed and distributed. Bills amended in Committee may be reprinted

(3) Where a Bill has been amended in a Committee or at Report Stage, it may be reprinted as amended in the discretion of the Committee or in the House, and when the Bill has been sent to be reprinted, it shall be marked on the Orders of the Day "Reprinting Pending" and shall not be further proceeded with until that mark has been removed and the word "Reprinted "substituted, signifying that the Bill has been reprinted and distributed. Reprinted Bills to be indicated

(4) Where a Bill is sent to be reprinted, the word "REPRINTED" shall be printed in large type on the face of the reprinted vers ion. Three readings before passing 87( 1) - Ev ery Bill shall receive three several readings, on different days, before being passed. Urgent cases

(2) By leave of the House, a Bill may be read twice or thrice, or advanced two or more stages in one day. Two readings before committal

(3) Every Bill shall be read twice in the House before being referred to a Committee or amended. Committal to Com mittee

(4) Every Bill, after having been read a second time, shall stand referred to a Committee and all petitions before the House, for or against the Bill, shall stand referred to that Committee. Order of consideration of a Bill 88( 1) - In considering a Bill or any Committee of the House, whether Standing, Special or of the Whole Ho use, consi derat ion of th e title, the

preamble and the first clause, if it contains only a

short title, shall be postponed and after every other clause is considered by the Committee in its proper order, the first clause, if it contains only a

short title, the

preamble and the title shall be consid ered last. Chairman to sign Bill

(2) The Chairman of a Committee to which a Bill is referred, shall sign with his full signature the House copy of each Bill reported by the Committee on which the amendments and corrections to the Bill, if any, are fairly inserted and shall also initial the several amendments or corrections made and the clauses added by the Comm ittee. Report on Bills

(3) All amendments made to a Bill in any Committee shall be reported to the House, and every Bill reported from any Committee, whether amended or not, shall be received by the House on report thereof. Report Stage

(4) Unle ss otherwise ordered by the House, the Report Stage of any Bill reported from any Standing or Special Committee shall not be taken into consideration prior to forty-eight hours following the presentation of the report of the Committee with respect thereto. Report from Committee of the Whole

(5) Notwithstanding sub-rule (4), a Bill reported from a Committee of the Whole House shall be 727 received and forthw ith di sposed of, without amendment. Notice of amendment at Report Stage

(6) Su bject to sub-rule (8), no motion to amend, delete, insert or restore any clause or provision of a Bill shall be entertained on the consideration of the Report Stage of the Bill unless notice of the motion has been given to the House before the Order of the Day for consideration of the Report Stage of the Bill has been called. Request for 24 hours deferment for amendment

(7) Where a written notice of a motion to amend, delete, insert or restore any clause or provision in a Bill is given prior to the consideration of the Report Stage of the Bill, and the Order of the Day for consideration of the Report Stage of the Bill is called before the end of the first sitting of the House after the notice is given, any member may request that the consideration of the Report Stage of the Bill be deferred until after the end of the first sitting of the House after the notice is given and, unless the House by a vote, unanimous except for tha t member, refuses th e request , th e consideraion of the Report Stage of the Bill shall be deferred until after the end of the first sitting of the House after the notice is given; but, if the consideration of the Report Stage of the Bill is deferred once under this Rule, the consideration of the Report Stage shall not again be deferred, except by resolution of the House.

Amendment without notice

(8) An amendment in relation to form only in a government Bill may be proposed by a Mi nister of the Crown without notice, but debate thereon may not be extended beyond the provisions of the clause or clauses to be amended. Note: The purpose of this sub-rule is to facilitate the incorporation into a Bill of amendments of a strictly consequential nature flowing from the acceptance of other amendments. No waiver of notice would be permitted in relation to any amendment which would change the intent of the Bill, no matter how slight ly, beyond the effect of the initial amendment. Debate on amendments

(9) When the Order of the Day for consideration of the Report Stage of a Bill Is called, any amendment of which notice has been given In accordance with sub-rule (6) is open to debate but no motion to amend the amendment shall be accepted except by consent of the House. Limitation on speeches ( 10) Where debate is permitted on an amendment, no member shall speak more than once or longer than twenty minutes, during the proceedings on the amendment at that stage, except that the Premier, the Leader of the Opposit ion, a Min ister of the Crown or other member sponsoring a Bill and the member proposing the amendment may speak for not more than forty minute�. Combining the amendments

(11) The Sp eaker may select or combin e amendments or clauses to be proposed at the Report Stage and may, if he thinks fit, call upon any member who has gi ven notice of an amendment to give such explanation of the subject

Wednead•y, 10 April, 1985 of the amendment as may enable the Speaker to form a judgment upon it. Deferring recorded division ( 12 ) When a recorde d division has been demanded on any amendment proposed during the Report Stage of a Bill, the Speaker may defer the calling in of the members for the purp ose of recording the "yeas" and "nays" until any or all subsequent amendments proposed to that Bill have been consider ed. A recorded division may not be so deferred from sitting to sitt ing.

Motion following Report Stage (1 3) Where proceedings at the Report Stage on any Bill have been concluded, a motion "that the Bill, as amended, be concurred in" or "that the Bill be concurred in" shall be put and forthwith dis posed of, without amendment or debate. Third reading (1 4) Where a Bill has been amended or a debate has taken place thereon at the Report Stage, the same shall be set down for a third reading and passage at the next sitting of the House.

Third reading where no amendment (1 5) Wher e a Bill has been reported from a Standing or Sp ecial Commi ttee , and no amendment has been proposed thereto at the Report Stage, and in the case of a Bill reported from a Committee of the Whole, with or without amendment, a motion "that the Bill be now read a third time and passed" may be made in the same sitting.

Recommittal 89 Where the Order of the Day for third reading of a Bill is read, any member desiring to recommit the Bill shall move to dis charge the Order and to recommit the Bill; ar.d, upon such a motion being resolved in the affirmative, the member shall give notice of the instructions to be giv en, but those instructions shall not be taken into consideration before the next sitting of the House. 13.

THAT Rules 104 to 121 inclus ive be repealed and the following substituted therefor: Deposit on filing petition for Pri vate Act 10 4( 1) At the time of filing a petition for a Priv ate Act, the petitioner shall deposit with the Clerk in cash or by cheque, draft, money order or other remittance, payable to the Minister of Finance of Manitoba, the sum of $250 plus an additional sum of $10 for every 450 words or fraction thereof contained in the Bill in excess of 4,500 words. Fees respecting Priv ate Acts or incorporation

(2) Before a Private Bill for incorporating a joint stock company with proposed authorized capital of more than $10 0,000, or for increasing the authorized capital of a joint stock company, is reported by the Committee to which it is referred, the petitioner shall deposit with the Clerk additional fees of $25 for each $10 0,000 or part thereof by which the authorized capital exceeds $1 00,000 or is increased, as the case may be.

Remittance for special petitioners 10 5(1) Whe re the petitioner is an instit ution, organiz ation or associat ion with chari tab le, religious or benevolent purposes, and is not carrying on, or intending to carry on, business for gain, the deposit may, su bject to sub-rules (2) and (3), be remitted to the petitioner. 728 Limitation of remittance

(2) No remittance of any deposit or fees paid in connection with a Private Bill shall be made: (

a) except upon the recommendation of the Committee to which the Bill has been referred; or (

b) if the Assembly, by resolution, orders that no remittance be made to the petitioner. Maximum remittance

(3) The remittance of any deposit or fees paid in accordance with this Rule shall not exceed the amount of the deposit or fees, less the actual cost of printing the Bill. Publication of notice by Clerk 106 The Clerk shall publish in the first issue of each month of the Manitoba Gazette a notice setting out sub-rule 10 7(1 ). Notice of application for Private Bill 107

(1) Every petitioner for a Private Bill shall publish, within twelv e months prior to the presentation of the petition for the Private Bill, (

a) in one issue of the Manitoba Gazette; and (

b) at least once in each of two weeks during the twelve month period aforementioned in an issue of a newspaper published in the English language and having a general circulation in the area of the province in which the persons or a majority of the persons, who would be interested in or affected by the Private Bill reside; a notice, in the form set out in

Schedule "A-1", signed by or on behalf of the petitioner and clearly and distinctly specifying the nature and object of the petition and any exceptional provision proposed to be inserted in the Bill. Where a Private Bill left on Order Paper at end of session

(2) Where a Private Bill remains on the Order Paper for First or Second Reading when the House is prorogued or dis solv ed, it may be introduced at the next session of the Legislature without publication of further notice under sub-rule (1) . Proof of publication

(3) Prior to the presentation of a petition in the House, the petitioner shall file with the Clerk a statutory declaration proving to the satisfaction of the Clerk, the due publication of the notices mentioned in sub-rule (1) . · Report by Law Officer 108

(1) Before any Private Bill is considered by the Committee to which it is referred, a report shall first be submitted to the Committee by the Law Officer or the Deputy Law Officer stating that he has examined the Bill, and has noted by

section in the report any exceptional powers sought and any other provisions of the Bill requiring special consideration. Model Bill for incorporation

(2) Every Private Bill for

an Act of incorporation or an amendment of any such Act shall be drawn in accordance with the Model Bill as set out in Appendix "B", with such variations and additions as to form as may be approved by the Law Officer. Reference to applicable general Acts

(3) Every Private Bill for incorporating a corporation shall be so framed as to make any general Act relating to the details of the corporation applicable to the corporation except as provided

Wednead•y, 10 April, 1985 in the Private Bills and special grounds shall be established for any proposed departure from the pr ovisions of any general Act of for the introduction of other provisions respect ing tho se details. Procedure where notice insufficient 109 Wher e a Commi ttee finds that the notice published under Rule 107 is ins ufficient either as regards the petition as a whole or as to any matter therein that ought to have been specially mentioned in the notice, it shall recom mend to the House the cours e to be taken with respect to the matter.

Notice of sitting of Committee 11 0 Notic e of any meeting for the consideration of a Private Bill by a Commi ttee shall be published in the Notice Paper and posted at least two days before the meeting on the notice board for the House. Appearance of inter ested parties 111 ( 1) Every person whose interest or property may be affec ted by any Private Bill may and, when required to do so by the Committee, shall appear before the Standing Commi ttee to which the Bill has been referred touch ing his consent or opposition to the Bill or may send his consent in writ ing, proof of which may be demanded by the Committee.

Where no consent of inter ested parties

(2) Wher e the consent of a person whose inter est or property may be affe cted by a Private Bill is not produced to the Committee, the Committee may require the petitioner for the Private Bill to serve a copy of the proposed Bill on the person and notify the person of the time and pla ce where the Committee will again consider the Private Bill. Proof of age

(3) The Commi ttee to which a Private Bill incorpora ting a company has been referred may requir e proof that the persons whose names appear in the Bill as composing the company are of the full age of majority and in a position to effect the objects contemplated and have consented to becoming incorpora ted. 14. THAT Appe ndix "A" be repealed and the following substituted ther efor: Appendix "A" Appendix "A-1" APPENDIX "A" MODEL PETITION To the Legislature of the Provinc e of Manitoba The petition of the undersigned . . . . . . of the .. .. of .. .. .. .. . humb ly shewet h.

That (her e state th e object desir ed by th e petitioner). WHEREFORE your petitioner humbly prays that The Legislature of the Province of Manitoba may be pl eased (to pa ss

an Act for the pur poses above mentioned). And as in duty bound your petitioner will ever pr ay. Signature .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 729 seal) (Date) (and seal, in the case of a corporation with a APPENDIX "·A-1" FORM OF NOTICE OF PETITION TO THE ASSEMBLY Take Notice th at ... . (Name of petitioner) ... . will present to the Legislativ e Assembly of Manitoba at the present (or next) session of the Legislatur e of Manitoba a petition (her e state th e object desired by th e petitioner). DATED at the . . . of . . . . . . in the Province of Manitoba, this .. · . day of ... ... . , 19 ..

Name and address of petitioner or solicitor for petitioner . MR. SPEAKER: The Honour ab le Memb er for Concordia. MR. P. FOX: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Rupertsland, that the report be received. MOTION presented and carried. MINISTE RIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Health. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This morning I received a few copies of the mid-term pr ogram evaluation of the Winni peg Core Area Agreement. Now, I would like to table one and give one to the opp osition.

I expect to have more copies later on and I'll see that ther e are more copies for each caucus, including the Independents. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I wish to table the Annual Report of the Manitoba Film Classification Board for the ye ar ending March 31, 1984, and I also have a Ministerial Stateme nt. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Mr.

Speaker, on Wednesday and Thursday of last week, the Honourable Sinclair St'.!vens, Federal Mi nister of Regional Industrial Expansion and Chair person of his gov ernment's Cabinet Com mittee on Economic and Regional Dev elopment, was in our provinc e to take

part in the seco nd annual Canada-

WednHday, 10 April, 1985 Manit oba Economic and Regional Develop ment Agreement Min isters' meeting. I'd like to give the House a brief report on that meeting, which I attended with my col leagues, the Minister of Energy and Min es and the Mi nister of Co operative Development.

I also have tabled documents which were released at the conclusion of the meeting, a joint communique, and a 1985 workplan for the Economic and Regional Development Agreement System in Manitoba called the "Course of Action: Year Two." Last week's meeting was the first formal Economic and Regional Development Agreement Minis ters' meet ing in whic h the new Federal Minis ter has participated. I believe Mr. Stevens will be holding similar meetings with the other nine provinces over the next few months. Last week's meeting also marked the fourth occasion on which I have been able to meet bilaterally with Mr.

Stevens since he took on his new responsibilities. At the first of those meetings in October of last year, Mr . Stevens expressed keen interest in Northern Manitoba and in the economic development initia tives · which our two governments are undertaking in the North. At that time, and at subsequent meetings, we also had lengthy discussions on the economic benefits.of renewed northern hydro-electric development both for our province and for the entire count ry.

Those earlier discussions explain our agreement to hold last week's Economic and Regional Development Agreement meeting in Gillam and our agreement in the 1985 Econom ic and Regional Development Agreement workplan, to sign, before the end of next month, a Canada-M anitoba Memorandum of Understanding for Hydro-Electric Development Project Co-ordination.

While it would be premature to discuss the contents of the federal -provincial Hydro Development Memorandum of Understandin g in detail, I can advise the House that its general purpose will be to ensure that the Federal and Provincial Governments work as closely together as possible to, in the words of the Course of Action, "empha size employment benefits for Northerners, to maximize industrial benefits and to manage environmental and other socio-eco nomic concerns." The Hydro Development Me morandum of Understanding is one of several important federal commitments which Mr.

Stevens confirmed at the Gillam meeting. Mem bers can refer to the Course of Action for the complete list which includes federal commitments to sign a new Tourism Development sub-agreement by the end of April and a new Industrial Development sub agreement by the end of June. Those will be the ninth and tenth Economic and Regional Development sub agreements for our province.

Priority is also being given as well to a new federal provincial Memorandum of Understanding on Scie nce and Technology and to work on potential joint initiatives in such areas as trade development, health care products and services, energy conservation, and co operative development, including employment co operatives. Mr.

Stevens also undertook, as lead Federal Mi nister for the Canada-Manitoba Economic and Regional 730 Development Agreement system, to convene a special meeting within the next month with the Federal Minister of Transport and the Manitoba Mini sters on progress to da te un der the Churchill and Transportation Development sub-agreements and, specifically , the concerns which my colleague, the Min ister of Highways and Transportation has expressed about possible CN layoffs in our province. Mr. Speaker , as I told the members of the media who were present at the news conference Mr.

Stevens and I held on our return from Gillam last Thursday, I felt our meeting was an excellent one and demonstrated, once again, the importa nce of federal-provincial co operation to the economic future of our province. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think that one best sums up this minis terial statement by the actions of this government, that all too often have now become a standard way of proceeding. First they tell us, and then they tell us they told us, and then they tell us again. Mr.

Spea ker, what's happening here is really nothing new and the Minister is really not telling us any great things that are happening that weren't happening before. The agreements, the federal-provincial agreements, as far as tourism, as far as industrial development, was all part of a package signed some seven-eight years ago, and this government is just extending that package. Mr.

Speaker, I want to say to members opposite that it's interesting to note that when they were in the opposition and we signed the Enterprise Manitoba Agreement and helped small business with small grants, they were the members who were berat ing and chastising us for signing that kind of agreement. Now, Mr. Speaker, we've got them merrily trooping along the same route and giving even bigger grants to larger businesses while smaller businesses are saying, how come we're left out of the whole scenario? Why aren't we included? So, Mr.

Speaker, what we are seeing happ en here is while we appreciate the concern that the Federal Government is showing with regard to Manitoba in the development of either Hydro resources or Trade and Technology - these are all things which I believe all Manitobans want to see happen because we want to see permanent long-term jobs created here - but let the government not get up and from time to time and say, look what good boys we are, look what we're doing - when a lot of things were happening before.

I want to say to members opposite that when it comes to making mi nisterial anno uncemen ts, when the Min ister, in his own announcement here, said he had a press conf erence announcing this before and then coming to the legislature to present it again - I'd appreciate it if he'd have something new and concrete to propose rather than stuff that he's already put forward in press conferences. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

Wednesd•y. 10 April, 1985 The Honourable Mini ster of Energy and Mines. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Min ister. HON. W. PARASIUK: I'm pleased to table later in the House today, an agreemen t reached between Manitoba and eight United States util ities on the principles for negotiations on a major elect ricity sale.

These utilities are: The Madison Gas and Electric Company of Madison, Wisconsin; The Wisconsin Electric Power Company of Mi lwau kee, Wiscon sin; The Wisconsin Power and Light Company of Madison, Wisco nsin; Wisconsin Public Power Incorporated of Sun Prairie, Wisc onsin; The Wisconsin Public Service Corporation of Green Bay, Wisco nsin; The Upper Peninsula Power Company of Escanaba, Michigan; The Min nesota Power Company of Duluth, Minnesota; and The Northern States Power Company of Minne apolis; Minn esota.

This export sale initi ative is the result of over two years of intensive work by the parties in exa mining and evaluating the benefits and costs associated with the . purch ase of hydro-electricity from Manitoba and the alternat ives available to the Wisco nsin utilities. The fea sibility studies generally concluded that the export of Ma nitoba Hydro electric power wo uld provide significant economic benefits both to Manitobans and to the American buyers. At the same time, no major social, environmental or political barriers could be ident ified with such a sale.

As a result, the study and research stage is now complete and negotiations have co mmenced at a meeting which took place within the last two wee ks in the United States with representatives of the eight utilities. The main pri nci ples which will un derlie the negotiations are:

(1) Manitoba would sell the power and energy equ ivalent to the production from Conawapa, the next hydro-electric generating station following Limestone on the Nelson River, an amount of about 1, 300 megawatts;

(2) The term of the sale would be 15 to 35 years with the sale to commence in the 1996 to 1998 period;

(3) The export sale would call for the constr uction of new transmission .facilities to a location in Min nesota and/or Wisco nsin; and (4) lt is the intention of the parties to reach agreement on a Me mo ran dum of Unders tanding on the proposed transaction or to conclude negotiations by October 15, 19 85. Mr.

Speaker, the Statement of Principl es refers to similar discussions now taking place with the Minnesota Wisconsin Power Suppl ies Group and the We stern Area Power Administration involving the sale of the output from a new major hydro-electric generating station, beg inning in the 1995-98 period. ' Successful negotiations with any one of these three groups of utili ties will mean the adva nc ement of 731 construction of the Conawapa Generating Station which will bring further long -term economic benefits for Manit obans. lt is estima ted that Conawapa would take 10 to 12 years to complete and would create about 9,000 person years in direct construction employment and 16 ,000 person years of indirect related employment in manufacturing and other Manitoba industries.

Furtherm ore, Mr . Speaker , we would anticipate making a significant profit for the people of Manitoba from a sale rel ated to Conawapa. Mr. Speaker, the recently concluded sale to Northern States Power has clearly shown the advantages that exports of hydro-electricity can bring to Manitoba. The early construction of the Limestone Generating Station and the very substantial profits associated with the Northern States Power sale are benefits that are welcomed by all Manitobans. These are the benefits that a sale from Cona wapa will also bring. In conclusion, Mr .

Speaker , the Government of Manitoba is proud of its accomplishments in this area and looks forward to the further development of our renewable hyd ro resources for th e benefit of all Manitobans. With the permission of the House, I would now like to table the agreement reached between Manitoba and the eight United States utilities, the final signato ry of which was received on April 2, 1985. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, In the Minister's last paragraph, he ind icates how proud this government is of their accompl ishments.

All that has been accomplished to date is that my file on Memoranda and Letters of Intent is growing bigger and thicker. Every once in a while we have to throw some out, of course. This same Min ister that brought us Letters of Intent and Memoranda of Understanding with power inten sive users like Alcoa, with hop es for a completion of a power exchange involved with the MANDAN line. Mr.

Speaker, only today, I underst and that the Nebraska people are very concerned about having to appear before a show-cause hearing in the State of North Dakota to show why the route permit for the now defunct MAND AN Project should be allowed to stand and that it lik ely will be cancelled. I remind this same Minister that project was geared to start up in Septem ber of 1984 - that was a year ago. Mr. Speaker, I hope, and I hope for Manitobans that if and when some of these agreements come to firm reality that, first of all, all true costs are included.

I do not want to see Ma ni tob a become the Newf oundland of the Prairies. I don't want to see us exporting our herita ge and our futur e and our opportunity for permanent jobs to Nebraska, to Minn esota, to Wisconsin, or to anywhere else but Manitoba. I remind the Honourable Min ister that after $3 billion are spent, and Limestone and Conawapa are in place, there are 30 to 40 permanent jobs left in Manito ba. That's all it takes to operate those projects. lt may be great to supply that source of power to the Americans, but what about expressing some concern for creat ing those jobs right here in Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, that

Wednesday, 10 April, 1985 : continues to be the fundamental difference between i our position and that of the gove rnment. We see the 1 opportunity for the use of that great natural resource, water, that we have for providing jobs in Manitoba . . That's first and foremost. · Mr. Speaker, I am in no hurry to give away or barter away those resources for such vague phra ses as • "significant profits" when it's highly doubtful whether · there are any profits to be taken, and

whereas they are prepared to seduce the public into believing that construction of the dams in thems elves can provide the last thing, the flywheel of economic development in this province. Mr . Speak er, I really believe, I kno w that my constituents in the lnterlake, many of them who have helped build the power projects that are now in place; starting with Grand Rapids, with Kettle - they are calling me right now and asking about jobs. These are marginal farmers in the lnterlake who supplement their incomes by going out to these Northern projects. Mr.

Speaker, little comfort do I have for them when we talk about 19 96, 19 98, when we talk about · possibilities of significant profits from property and all · the other taxes are rising in this province. This Mi nister is se tting a record in making this kind of announ cement. The people of Manitoba will be watching, as we will be watching, with a great deal of interest as to whether or not he is as quick to make the announ cements when · things don't come to fruition. Thank you, Mr. Speak er. MA. SPEAKER: Order please. Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills . INT RODUCTION OF GUESTS MA.

SPEAKER : Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have 26 students of Grade 7 to 10 standing from the St. Peter's Yo uth Group in Uni ty, Saskatchewan. They are under the direction of Mr. Gregoire. On behalf of all of the members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS Health services cutbacks - Confidentiality of medical records MA. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MA. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minis ter of Health.

Can the Mini ster of He alth ind icate to the House whether Manitobans who choose to present problems dealing with services provided by his department, and in presenting those problems and allegations of cutba cks to the Min ister of Health, through members of the opposi tion, will find thems elves treated as the Minister of Health treated one constituent in Manitoba - a constituent of the Member for Transcona - in that the re tribution for drawing the government's attention to a problem will be having their complete medical re cords brought out in public and medical expenses and funding from Department of Health programmings made public, 732 in retribution for daring to complain to the Minis ter of Health and to his department?

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MA. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Mi nister of Health. HON. L. DESJAADINS: Mr. Speaker, first of all the member should start by telling the truth . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear! HON. L. DESJAADINS: He was the one that brought a certain person who made allegations, who made accusations, who had gone all over the place to try to pretend that this government was not interested in people that were sick. At no time did I give the medica l report. All I did, as I stood in my seat, was give the information of how much money we had spent on that individual.

And if that presents itself again, I will do the same thing. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MA. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. I would ask the honourable member to ensure that his questions conform with the normal gui delines for Oral Question period . The Honourable Member for Pembina. MA. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Speaker, the Minis ter of Health chose to reveal departmental expenditures last night on an individual whose problems I drew to his attention. I did not ask for that information the other night. The Min ister, in . . . MA. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Does the honourable member have a question?

If so, would he please pose it? The Honourable Member for Pembina. MA. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Speaker, can the Minis ter assure the House that similar treatment to Manitobans, who draw to this governmen t's attention, whether it be by members of the opposition or by the media, can they be assured that their records of government support will not be made public in such a callous way as the Mi nister of Health did last night? HON. L. DESJAADINS: Mr.

Speaker, I go on record today as saying that during my Estimates, when we were looking at the expenditures, if the member is irresponsible enough to make an accusation before knowing the facts - in the past I've given this privately. The person was named. The allegation was made that we had cut - because he mentioned that again toda y - and when you're spending $70,000 on one person in a year, that's a hell of a cut. A MEMBER: That's not the point, that's not the point. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please.

Wednesday , 10 April, 1985 The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Speaker , the Min ister has once again demonst rated the problem by ref erring to the amount of money and government support. Will he answer the direct question? If Manitobans bring their problems to the Mi nister of Health, can he offer them the assurance th at their medical reco rds, th e government support of those people will not be made public as he did? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speak er , the one that raised this allegation is the honourable member that's speaking now.

He stood up in his seat; he mentioned a person; he said that we had cut, we were making cuts, and what I did, I stood up, I got the information. He mentioned the person and I said, that's what we gave in 1981 - $39,000 - I'll repeat it again. In 1982 - $42,000; in 1983 - $73,000 and I ask him if that was a cut. If he asked me the same question, the same way, I'll answer the same way. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Speaker , the Min ister of Health has once again viola ted the privacy of an individual Manitoban.

If in future a constituent comes to me with a medical problem where they think they have been mistreated, und erserviced, or have a complaint with the Department of Health and I raise that problem with thd Min ister of Health, can he assure that individual th at their medical records and th e go vernment expenditures on that person will not become a matter of public record in the callous mann er used by the Min ister of Health last night? HON. L. DESJARDINS: If in the future my honourable friend wants to know some information, he could ask me privately .

If he chose not to do that, he could not mention the name or give me the name privately, I will give him the information. If in the future my honourable · friend or any mem bers in this Ho use make an accusation that we're cutting down on support to a person, names that person, I will give him the answer. A MEMBER: What about th e privacy of medical records? MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Memb er for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker .

So then the Min ister has assured the House with his answ er, that anyone who feels cut back by the Department of Health will have their records exposed . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. If th e Honourable Member for Pembina ha s a ques tion, would he please place that question without a hypothesis and without argument? The Honourable Member for Arthur . Sugar beet industry - Assistance to MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker , I have a quest ion to the First Minis ter.

In view of the fact that we have some 450 sugar beet producers in the province that have not got contra cts to prod uce sugar this year and it is now seed ing time, can the First Mi nister assure the people of Manitoba and tho se producers of sugar th at he ha s done everyt hing in his power to make sure we will have a sugar Indus try in the province tllis coming year and the producers will have a cont ract with the sugar company? 733 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minis ter. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speak er, I believe it was a little over a week ago that I had an oppor tuni ty, as the honourable member kno ws, to raise the question of the sugar beet issue with the Federal Minis ter of Agriculture. The Federal Min ister of Agriculture indicated to me that the Federal Government was quite aware of the problem confronting the sugar beet producers of West ern Canada, particularly those in Alberta and Manitoba, that he had delegated responsibility for exploring different avenues that could be pursued with the Mi nister responsible for the Wheat Board, the Honourab le Mr.

Mayer of the Portage and Marque tte Constituency; and that he would be anticipating a response from the Mi nister responsible for the Wheat Board and then would be in a position to respond to my inqui ry that I made direct ly to the Min ister of Agriculture. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the government of Alberta have taken action and assured their sugar beet producers th at they would get $10 a ton assistance from the gover nment for this year's production, is the Province of Manitoba prepared to make that same offer to the Manitoba sugar beet producers? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speak er, as I indicated to the honourable member just a few moments ago, l'v� raised this matter with the Federal Minis ter of Agriculture that acknowledged to me it was a problem th at he recognized was one of Federa i-Canadian sign ificance and th at inde ed he wou ld ensure, by delegating resp onsibility to the Minis ter respon sible for the Wheat Board to make different recomme ndations to him. He was then going to respond to the Minister of Agriculture and myself at the provincial level. Mr.

Speaker, I think it would be in the inter est of all parties that we await what I assume to be initiative that is being un dertaken by the other two Min isters at the federal level in regard to the sugar beet issue. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that the Federal Minister respo nsible for the Canadian Wheat Board is dealing with the matter - and I'm aware that he is and has just paid some $450 million out to We stern Canadian grain farmers - and I'm sure is, as well, sympathetic to the Manitoba sugar beet gro wers, 11 e qu estion dir ected to the First Min ister is, is I '> government prepared to offer the same commitmeo .t to the Manitoba sugar beet growers as the Gover nment of Alberta have to their sugar beet growers to assure Manitoba has a sugar industry in the province for this the his ent

Wednesday, 10 April, 1985 year? Is he prepared to commit the same kind of monies that Alberta have committed to their producers, in . Manitoba, as there was in Alberta? Will he make that commitment? 1 HON. H. PAWLEY: The Mi nister of Agricultur e for the i Province of Ma nit oba has met with the Min iste r responsi ble for the Canadian Wheat Board in regard to this question.

He'll be making a report to us shortly in regard to his discussions that have been taking place. , In regard to the Min ister responsible for the Wheat I Board, maybe the Honourable Member for Arthur is indi cating to us that he is aware of some proposals that the Federal Minister responsible for the Wheat . Board has made to the Manitoba Minis ter of Agriculture. I don't know whether he's suggesting that or not in this Chamber.

I think we'd be best to await the advice as to recom mendations that the Federal Government is prepared to undertake in regard to their area, due responsibility in regard to a matter which I know is of paramount concern to the sugar beet ind ustry and to members of this House. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr . Speaker , this weekend my colleague from Rhineland is joining the Manitoba sugar beet growers and the sugar beet growers from Alberta to go to Ottawa to dis cuss with the Federal Government ' a federal stabilization program.

Will this First Minister give this House the commitment that his provi nce is prepared to do the same thing as the Alberta Government is, for his sugar beet growers when they go to that meeting this weekend? SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, let it be duly recorded in this Chamber that several honourable members across the way, for the first time have acknowledged that profits will be accruing to the Provinc e of Manitoba as a result of the sale of hydro to the Northern States Power. Let it be duly recorded so that all may know.

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, orde r please. The Honourable Member for Lakeside on a point of order. MR. H. ENNS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, because I know the Fi rst Minister surely doesn't want to leave a falsehood on the record. What hydro profits, Mr. Speaker? Maybe some hydro profits, but if I understood the Premier right . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. The honourable member did not have a point of order. The Honourable Fi rst Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, again I believe you will note that's the fourth form by which the same question has been posed to me in regard to whether Manitoba is to do a carbon copy of what the Alberta 734 Gove rnment has done in respect to its sugar beet farmers. The honourable member referred to visits that will be undertaken by the members of the Conservative caucus this coming weekend to Ottawa and I commend them on their init iative on making representations to the Federal Government.

They are, of course, two weeks late insofar as our government is concerned because my recommendations were made, requests for attention were made to the Federal Minis ter of Agriculture, I· believe it was some 10 days ago, so I welcome however the efforts on behalf of the Honourable Member for Rhineland, I gather the Honourable Member for Arthur, in making additional recommendations to the Federal Government and possibly as a result of our request to the Federal Minis ter of Agriculture, and probably as well the result of the recommendations honourable members will be making to the Federal Government, we will have early response from the Fe deral Government as to their initiatives.

I think, Mr. Speaker, it's in the public interest at this point that we await a response from the appropria te jurisdiction in regard to this matter. Sugar beet industry - Layoffs MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Keeping in mind that the Manitoba Sugar Company is a constituent of mine and employs approximately 200 people on a full-time basis and that doubles to about 400 to 500 people during the winter season when the processing is going on, my question is to the Minister of Labour.

As the company has not entered into any new contracts with the beet growers this spring, has either the Manitoba Sugar Company or its owner, B.C. Sugar Company, advised the government that there will be layoffs at this company in the very near future? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Labour. HON. A. MACKLING: Not to my personal knowledge, Mr. Speaker. MR. C. BIRT: Will the Mini ster check with his staff to see if that information has been given to his staff and, if so, would he bring that forward to the House as quickly as possible? HON. A.

MACKLING: I'll take the question as further notice and advise if such information has been received. MR. C. BIRT: My next question is to the Mini ster of Indust ry. Has the Min ister entered into any negotiations with the com pany to provide them with any financial assistance or any co-operative grants to ensur e that they stay as a viable entity? · MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Wedneect.y, 10 April, 1185 We have had discussions with the represe ntativ es of the company. They ind icated that they did not see the need for any assista nce by the Provincial Government. They saw no problems related to op erating in the Provi nce of Manitoba, that the problem is related to the areas that have been explored with respect to the producers and the Federal Government. Life insurance and pension management study - Government entry into MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minis ter responsible for MPI C.

A few weeks ago, it was indicated by the Minister and the Premier that decision on the gov ernment's potential entry into the life insurance industry was going to be resolved by meetings with the ind ustry. My question to the Min ister is why did the gov ernment cancel meetings with representatives of the Canadian Life and Health Insuranc e Association last Thursday? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Housing. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to correct the Leader of the Opposition. The meeting has been postponed simply because there were other commitments at that time. , MR. G.

FILMON: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Premier ind icated a great anxiety to get together · as soon as possible with the ind ustry and discuss those concerns, when has the meeting been reappointed for? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: The meeting has been postponed. I would certainly hope that the meeting will be held in the fairly near future. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, does the Min ister then ind icate that no date has been set for the meeting? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: I don't know what efforts have been made to determine the earliest possible date, but we will certainly hold a meeting at the time when it is most mutually convenient. I would antici pate that meeting will be held within a number of weeks. Energy sale to U.S. Ramifications of MR. SPEAKER: The Hono ura ble Memb er for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Energy and Mines.

In view of the fact that there appears to be a lack of recognition of the signif icance of the announcement he made today by some members of this Hous e, I wonder if he could outline the exact ramifications of the announcement that he made earlier. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Energy and Mines. 735 HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to answer a question that is obviously seeking some information on some positiv e aspects and positiv e developments for Manitoba. This is indeed in some contrast to the sour grapes and negativ e attitude that we heard from the Me mber for Lak esid e .

I can appreciate his sour grapes. They had four years from 1977-19 81 to achieve at something ... SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. W PARASIUK: . . . with respect to Hydro . MR. SPEAK ER: Order please, order please. Order please. Oral Questions are asked for the purp ose of obtaining information. The Honourable Mini ster should not use it as a reason to make a speech however short. The Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: I was somewhat detracted in my

preamble by the earlier comments by the Member for Lakeside, but certainly I'm pleased to give to the people of Manitoba, at least the members on this side of the House and hopefully the members on that side of the House, the information that the study and discussion aspect of this which has been taking place for two years and has a very solid substant ive basis in homework by both sides, has now reached the stage where eight utilities have signed this agreement of principles for negotiation.

There was a process of signatures going through the months of February, March and early April, because there are eight utilities involved, and this document had to go to each one of those and did so on a sequential basis. We certainly are pleased that we have reached the stage where eight separate utilities in the United States had determined that it is useful to have substan tive negotiations, Mr. Speaker, substantive negotiations that could lead to a very profound and exciting development for the people of Manitoba. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, a supplement ary.

In view of the fact tha t the Memoran dum of Understanding between the Federal and Provincial Governments which the Min ister of Indus try, Trade and Technology outlined earlier, ind icated interest in terms of emphasizing employment benefits for Northerners, maximizing industrial benefits, and a number of other joint efforts in volving the Federal-Provincial Governments, I was wondering if the Minister would keep the Federal Government, which does seem to be interested in hydro development in Manitoba, abreast of this latest development? HON. W.

PARASIUK: I certainly will respond to that by saying, yes, we welcome the Federal Conservativ e Governm ent's interest and desire to help ensure that Manitobans receive the maximum spin-oils from hydro development. This is in sharp contrast, I might add, to the Provincial Progressive Conservativ es who seem to be compl ete ly and totally opposed to hydro

Wednesday, 10 April, 1985 development which I find to be quite a flip flop from their position in 1980 and 19 81, but, Mr. Speaker, I certainly would be pleased to send this material to the Federal Mi nister of Energy, Mines and Resources and to the Minister responsible for chairing the Economic Development Committee and the Federal Government. Grenada Demonstration Inquiry Report - Tabling of MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Attorney-General, Mr.

Speaker. lt's with respect to his tabling the Grenada Demonstration Inquiry Report last night in the House. I would ask him when he received the report and why did he choose to table the report last night in the House and make a Minis terial Statement at that time when certainly members of the House and the media were all of the understanding that the House would just deal with Estimates last night? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: I'm very pleased to be able to · answer that question, Mr. Speaker. I received the report on the Thursday before Good Frida y.

Staff was not I availa ble on Monday for distribution of the report, so ·1 that it could be simultaneously dis tributed to the Winnipeg Police Association, the Winnipeg Police, and ! so on, so I decided to bring it into the House on Tuesday, I the very earliest possible date in view of that intended : scenario. · Members may recall I had the report in the House I Tuesday at 2:00 o'clock and at that time I had sent it : out to the Winnipeg Police Association, their counsel 1 and so on, but members may recall that we moved into Condolences.

For that reason and for that reason alone, I decided it would be improper to table the report as a matter of some question and contr oversy in those proceedings. I think that was a very fair and proper · thing for me to do. I still decided that it was only fair to the House, having sent the report out to the parties involv ed, to table it at the earliest opportuni ty. I was advised and, indeed, so it appeared, that the routine proceedings which were to have been handled in the afternoon were to be handled in the first event of the evening. That, indeed. was what took place. That's ex actly what happe ned, Mr.

Speaker , and any suggestion of any improper motives on my

part is scu rrilous, to say the le ast , in view of tho se cir cumstances when, out of deference to the passing of an honoured member of this House, I chose not to table it - although it was with me, the report, at 2:00 o'clock in the afternoon - but in the evening at the earliest possible opportun ity. I did the right thing and I'll defend it to my death. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable House Leader on a point of order. HON. A. ANSTETT: No, Mr. Speaker, not a point of order. 736 I believe I have information respecting the question which was asked by the Member for St.

Norbert which may shed some light on his question. I'd like to - (Interjection) - I didn't expect the question to be asked. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. An answer has been giv en. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MER CIER: Mr. Speaker , in the Attorney General's ministerial statement, he indicates that he is accepting the first two recommendations with respect to staying the charges against the demonstrators and not laying any fur ther charges against any other persons, and he has instru cted Crown Attorneys according ly.

He's ind icated he received the report the day before Good Frida y. Could he advise the House whether the Director of Prosecutions reviewed the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and concurs in the staying of the charges which have been laid against the demonstrators? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, in the first instance there is no Director of Prosecutions. The report was received on Thursday by myself and by my deputy,' and we both, independent ly, read it over the weekend; discussed it on Monday.

I had the opportunity of reading the full report and the complete evidenc e which was attached as an exhibit to the report. I have no hesitation in saying that the report, which is the report writt en by Jeff Oliphant, Q.C.- one of the few credible Tories left in this province, I may say, after listening to that bunch - and counsel, Perry Schulman, Q.C., who was the Tory candidate against me in the last electi on, so this notion of some politics about the thing is again scurril ous and I reject it.

After reviewing the evidence, I took the political responsibility -because it is my responsibility -to have come to a decision on the first two recommendations which were -let's be dear what those recommendations were and what my decision was -namely, that the charges outstanding would be stayed and that where, in fact, there is a prima facie case to be put before the court that could involv e charges against police persons and the counter demonstrators, I also agreed not to proceed in that direction. Again, it was a very even-handed approach taken by the Commission of Inquir y, taken by Mr.

Oliphant -who again let me say is one of the few credible Tories left in this provi nce -and I agreed with it and I followed it, and again, I'll defend it to the day of my death. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, regrettably for this province, this Attorney-General has now become the Director of Prosecutions. Mr. Speaker, a final question to the Attorney-General. Could the Attorney-General advise the House as to the full costs of this inqu iry? HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the first part of the statement of the Member for St. Norbert,

Wedneada� 10 April, 1985 he should remember -because he was the Attorney General -that indeed that is the role of an Attorney General; that the Attorney-General, both by law and by statut e , has the responsibil ity for prosecutions ultimately. Secondly, with respect to that question that was raised by him, I would like to point out that I'll take that as notice and bring in the full cost of the inquiry in due course. I would also like t o point out that the Governm ent House Leader a dv ised the Leader of the Oppos ition and the Opposit ion House Leader that the report would be tabled at 8:00 p.m. yesterday.

They were adv ised that at 4:00 o'clo ck yesterday afternoon, so this underscores the scurrilous nature of the kind of charges - particularly lying in the mouth of the Member for Pembina, that this Hou se ought to hear less of. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Does the Honourable Member for Lakeside have a point of order? MR. H. ENNS: Yes, on a point of order. lt was indicated to him that we would not be proceeding, which could have been our choice, I suppose, with normal business in the evening Session as well; that is, we would forego the question period.

The Government House Leader ind icated to me that a report was to be tabled, it was not specifically referred to. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader, to the same point? HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, to the same point of order. Yesterday in the Premier's Office, I spoke with the Leader of the Opposition, who asked what the business would be that evening. I advised we would only be doing routine proceedings and I expected to be going straight into Supp ly.

I did advise that the Attorney-General had a report he had planned on tabling and I did name that report to the Leader of the Opposition, to the Opposition House Leader. I said it was an important report, that the Attorney-General had committed himself to tabling, and would be tabling that evening. I made that very clear to the Opposition House Leader; to the Opposition Leader, I named the report.

I also, Sir, advised those members of the media, who inquired about what was going to happen tomorrow evening, because we had adjourned and would be commencing a new sitting, that the Attorney-General had an important report he would be tabling. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I thank both members for that explanation. Morgentaler Clinic - Police raids MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to direct a question to the Attorney-General and ask him whether the raids carried out on the Morgentaler Clinic by the Winnipeg Police have been with the approval of the Attorney-General or cont rary to his own direction? 737 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Neither, Mr. Speaker. The Winnip eg Police, and indeed any pol ice department, derives its ultimate authority and responsibility and duty at law from the Criminal Code in the Criminal Law. lt does not deriv e from an Attorney-General.

We do not have here or elsewhere in Canada a political police force directed by an elected member of the House and a member of Executiv e Council, therefore the actions taken by the police are taken within the sphere of their responsibil ity. That has always been the case. I expect it always will, at least as long as I'm occupying this position. Secondly, Mr.

Speaker, we do -in the way in which charges are brought in this jurisdiction -it differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction -there's a good working relationship between the Crown and the police -an excellent one -and we do from time-to-time give them legal advice with respect to charges that ought to be laid as a result of their investigation. We have no difficulty in that working relationship with the Winnipeg Police, or indeed with any other police department. MR. R. DOERN: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to ask the Attorney-General then why he directed picketers, who were picketing his own home, to go to the Winnipeg Police, harass them, and attempt to dissuade them from properly performing their duty? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I'm not sure that the question refers to a matter which is in the administrative competence of the Minister. Would the honourable member wish to rephrase his question? MR. R. DOERN: Mr.

Speaker, the Attorney-General, I think a week ago, advised demonstrators to go to the Winnipeg Police and pressure them to dissuade them from properly performing their functions, and I find that a curious action on behalf of the Attorney-General. I'm asking the Attorney-GeAeral whether that, in fact, is not some indication that he's trying to abdicate his responsibility and trying to have the public pressure the police to take the heat off himself, because he, himself, is not properly performing his function. MR. SPEAKER: Order please . The question is argumentative. The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R.

DOERN: I simply would like to ask the Attorney General then, in lieu of that, whether he is prepared to assume his duties and responsibilities as the chief law officer of the Provinc e of Manitoba? HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, it will not have escaped your attention, indeed of any decent and thinking member of this House, that not once did the honourable member ask me whether or not I said that. That wouldn't occur to him as a proper question, rather he would put it in the context that he believed to be the case -because he wants to believe it be the case -and then draw his conclusions. Mr.

Speaker, that indeed is not what I said to that group or any other group. I said -and I know what I

Wednesday, 10 April, 1985 said -that if you have a complaint about the police activity, then there are proper channels for you to take that course. That is a responsible and accurate thing for me to say.

Where there is criticism of police activity, we have the Law Enforcement Review Agency, or if it's not of that character, they can take that issue up with the police officials; and indeed, I'm advised that that group met in a very frank and friendly -and not a harassing way -with the police in a very useful exchange of information understanding the respective duties of the Attorney-General and of the police and indeed, to that extent, my advice as to where complaints could be taken was followed and followed usefully. That's the way a democratic society works. But a democratic society, Mr.

Speaker, does not work when an elected member of the House brings misinformation to the House and uses that as a premise for another one of his -well, I'll drop any adjective -questions. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOE RN: Mr . Sp eaker , holding aside the Attorney-General's weak defence, I would like to ask the Premier the following question.

Given that the Winnipeg Police have been properly performing their function and given that the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons have been properly • executing their duties, while the Attorney-General is sitting on the sidelines, paralysed into inaction, plagued with a crisis of conscience, doing nothing, I ask the Attorney-General whether he is prepared to replace this man with somebody who will be prepared to uphold the law in this province and execute his duties and responsi bilities . MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. That is not a question, that is an argument. Oral Questions.

The Honour able Minister of Culture. The Honourable Member for Elmwood on a point of order. MR. R. DOERN: I want to know whether it is in order for me to ask a question of the Premier, whether he doesn't feel that at this point in time his Attorney General has failed to execute his responsibilities. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. That is not a point of order. I sent all honourable members a copy of some guidelines respecting question period which is taken from Beauchesne, which has the same information in much more depth.

If the honourable member wishes to know what is in order, he should consult Beauchesne for the answer. Western Canada Lotteries Foundation - Laying off of staff MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I took, perhaps a week ago, some questions as notice with regard to the Western Canada Lottery Foundation and some layoffs as a result of British Columbia's decision 738 to withdr aw from the foundation.

I can report to the House that the number of layoffs that have occurred or will occur as a result of the British Colum bia government's pull-out from the Western Canada Lottery Foundation is a total of 17 positions, 8 of which are full-time and 9 of which are part-time. There still will remain in the Western Canada Lottery Foundation 17 0 jobs or positions, of which 134 are in the Provi nce of Manitoba. There was also a suggestion that there was some commitment that there would not be any layoffs as a result of British Columbia pulling out of the Western Canada Lottery Foundation and that was not true.

The former Minister did indic ate that there would be some small reduction in the staff, but I think it's Important to note, Mr. Speaker, that at stake was the total of 134 jobs if British Columbia had been successful in moving all of the operations of the Western Canada Lottery Foundation from Manitoba to British Columbia. Casino - Winnip eg Convention Centre In addition, I took as notice questions regarding the operation of casinos in the Convention Centre. I can report that the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation is renting space in the Convention Centre for a casino for 90 days per year.

They are also renting some smaller space on an ongoing basis for storage and other uses for the ongoing operation of the casinos. All of the reve nues are deposited, not with ·the gove rnment but with the Manitoba Lottery Foundation bank accounts. They have not as yet entered into a long-term lease arrangement, but they do plan to sign a five-year lease with the Convention Centre when negotiations are concluded. Casinos - hours of operation In addition, there was a question regarding the change of hours of operation. I can confirm that the hours of operation for casinos have changed to 11: 30 a. m. to 1: 30 p.m.

The changes were made by the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation to respond to demands from the public for increased opportunity to play during the days the casinos are operated, and to generate greater revenues for charita ble organizations. Grenada Demonstration Inquiry Report - Peter Balagus, witness MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Leade r of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Premier can ind icate if one of the witnesses who is listed in this inquir y report, Michael Peter Balagus is now employed by the Manitoba Governm ent. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I believe he was a witness as a member of the media to the commission. MR. G. FILMON: He is? MR. H. ENNS: He's your speech writer.

Wednesday, 10 April, 1985 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of th e Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: I wonder if the Premier could indi cate what his position is with the Manitoba Government? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, he's involved with Communic ations and in fact will be working under my respo nsibil ity. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The time for Oral Questions has expired. NON-PO LITICAL STATEMENT MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the House to make a non-political statement. · MR.

SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Speaker, I want to assure you that this is strictly a non-political statement. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Does the honourable member have leave? The Honourable Government House Leader on a point of order. HON. A. AN STETT: Ye s, we are prepared to grant leave this time, Mr. Speaker , on the understanding that this is strictly a non-partisan statement and will not be a breach of our rules. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Forty Canadians participated in the Special Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah. Out of the 40 Canadians, 9 members were from the Province of Manitoba. Of these 9, 17- year-old Richard Wall from Niverville won two medals in spee dskating, a silver medal in the 75 metre race and a bronze medal in the 350 metre race. I would like to ask members of this House and the people of Manitoba to join in congratulating Richard Wall on his tremendo us and · courageous accomplishment. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear! ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government Hous e Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr.

Speaker, would you call the bills standing as adjourned debate on second read ing in the order in which they appear on the Order Paper, and following that, Mr. Speaker , I would propose that we move to Commi ttee of Supply . 739 MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Hon ourable Mi ni ster of Hea lth, Bill No. 2, the Honourable Member for Pem bina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Stand, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Stand. On the proposed motion of the Honourable Attorney General, Bill No. 17, The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Stand, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Stand.

On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Mu nicipal Affairs, Bill No. 22, the Honourable Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Stand, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Stand. The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr . Sp eaker , I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Mi nister of Employment Services and Economic Security that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Sup ply to be gran ted to Her Ma jesty with The Honourable Member for River East In the Chair for the Department of Health and the Honourable Member for Bu rrows in the Chair for the Department of Highways and Transportation. CONCURRENT COM MIT TEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - HIGHWAYS AND TRANSP ORTATION MR. CHAIRMAN, P. Santoa: The Committee will please come to order. We are considering Item No. 3.(a)( 1) Planning and Design and Land Surveys, Planning and Des ign, Salaries and Wages; 3.(a)

(2) Other Expenditu res. The Member for Vlrden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, last evening when we left off, I indicated that I had some other concerns in the Planning and Design area. I'd like to refer the Honourable Minister to PR 354 from Elphinstone south to the Ye llowhead Highway. it's my understanding that there have been requests for rebuilding it for a numb er of years.

There ha ve been designs put forward by his planning department which have not met with the approval of the rural municipality and all those concerned in that area. it's also my und erstanding that several years ago, an alternate route was put forward and at that time I believe there was general agreement to proceed in that

Wednesday, 10 April, 1915 manner where it requir ed much less land acquisition. I'm now told that the department seems to want to go back to the original plan which requi res taking a large number of acres out of agricultural production. That seems to be contrary to the stated plans and priorities of both this government and the previous government, that agricultural land should be preserved for agricultural purposes wherever possible. lt now appears as though the department wants to take considerably more acreage out of agricultural production and go back to their original design which would go through Mr .

Robert son 's farm tor approxi mately thr ee-quarters of a mile of new location, rather than follow the existing valley road which is a very scenic drive, and one that people for miles around wish to use at least half a dozen times during the summer because of the beautiful scenery. Could the Mi nister ind icate what the present plans of the department are, although I notice that there is nothing in this year's Estima tes for that particular road? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I believe, Mr. Chairman, that there is a project in carry-over in that area.

I know that there has been a lot of difference of opinion, as the member has indicated, as to what the best route would be. There has been a meeting. We met last year - last summer or last fall - with the R.M. of Strathclair; I believe, to discuss some alternat ives that they had, that they felt should be looked at by the council, regarding relocation of an entire length of that sect ion, east of its present location. We've determined that that option would cost approxima tely twice as much as upgrading it in its present location, so that is not a viable option.

The existing road, as the member knows, has very poor alignment and it's very low and narrow and it does need upgrading, there's no doubt about it, but the survey and design work has not yet been finali zed by the department, so we are not therefore putting it forward as a particular project. lt is being considered; discussions are continuing to take place with the people in the area to try to get some agreement as to the best location. We will continue to do that, to try to arrive at an agreement there. MR. H. GRAHAM: We ll, Mr.

Chairman, some years ago I belie ve there was an inspection carried out by the Minister of Highways at that time, who looked at the proposed route that is proposed by his department, which involves the acquisition of a large amount of farmland and relocates it about three -qu arters of a mile east. At that time the Mi nister agreed that that would not be a good selection because it would take a considerable amount of farm land.

There was an aerial survey taken and a projected new route which met with the Minister's approval at that time, which would only involve maybe three or four acres of land, and taking much less land out of prod uction. I don't kno w whether that was ever committed to paper or not, but it now appears as though the district engineer , who seems to have an awful lot of weight, is again insisting that it's my way or the doorway and if we don't build it on the original thing, the project does not seem to be put forward as one that is accept able.

So the people of the area are becoming frust rated because it would appear that the only way they can get the road rebuilt is to accept the original proposal of the engineers, which takes a large amount of land out of agricultural production. So I raise it, Mr.

Minis ter, because it does come under Planning and Design. lt ind icates that there appears to be a large degree of decision-making power that rests in the district office, and it also appears as though the program of this government and the previous· govern ment, which is to preserve agricultural land for agricultural use wherever possible. lt appears as though that program is being thrown out the windo w. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, no, that certainly isn't the case.

We 're always very concerned about ensuring that the impact on landowners Is as minimal as possible, particularly where it involves productive agricultural land, and any option that we consider would obviously give considerable weight to the matter of agricultural land. 740 On the other hand, there is very often other very important considerations that have to be taken into account when determ ining final alignment as well in terms of the soil conditions, the proximity to a river, for example, if we're looking at bank stabilization or having to go too close, if their initial right- of-way is very close to a waterway where there's erosion and so on, there has to be a move.

The terrain in the area has to be considered. So, there's a number of facts that have to be considered , but I can assure the member that we will attempt to minimize the taking of agricultural land and also consider the views of the local people. That's what we're doing now.

As a matter of fact, if I recall correctly, the plan that was favoured by the department was one that we decided after meeting with the local council was not the one that we would like to approve. lt had not been finalized and we actually instructed the district engineer to go back and hear the suggestions of the council once again, take those points into consideration and see whether it was feasible to take the steps that they were suggesting to agree with what they felt were the priorit ies with regard to the location.

So, they have been doing that in consulting, I believe, if the Instructions have gone out correctly, and there's been no final decision. The location study is still in the program and once the route has been agreed on taking into account all of the various concerns, then we would proceed with the design work. I think, very clearly, just to emph asize, the district engineer does the local planning and brings the plan forward to the planning branch central ly. Their final recommendations are made to the deputy minis ter and the Min ister.

So, it doesn't rest in the hands of the district engineer , but obviou sly, he's the person and his staff who deal directly with these people on a daily basis or whatever the case may be. At least they kno w the situation the best and, therefore, the people that should be undertaking discussions, and we encourage them to be flex ible and cognizant . of the concerns of the local people. That's what we'd like to see. MR. H. GRAHAM: Well, Mr. Chairman, I would gladly offer my assistance to the Minister to take him out for

Wec:lnesct.y, 10 April, 1SII5 an on-site inspection. I would even offer to provide him with aerial service when he's ther e so he can have an aerial inspection of the area as well. Whenever the Min ister, at his discretion, would care to visit, I would be pleased to make all the arrangements for that to happen. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I thank the member for that offer. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to raise the question about the planning and design of the bridge on Highway 23 west of 59. I hope the Min ister is well aware of the bridge that I'm talking about.

There has been some major concern e xpressed by many people in the area, as well the R.M. of De Salaberry, who have run into major problems because trucks coming down Highway 23 come to the restricted bridge and use municipal roads as a result of it and have been banging up those roads. There has been some disappointment that the Min ister could not pre tender this bridge and the information I received was that the planning and design of the bridge was not completed. I wonder if the Mini ster could ind icate the status of the bridge at this stage of the game? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: The detour with re gard to that bridge will be undertaken almost imme diately, as soon as the spring run-off is complete. I am not certain of the exact conditions in that area, but that detour is being put in place and the bridge will be constructed this summer . We did put a priority on that design work, as a result of the meeting that I had with the honourable member and a couple of his colleagues on this issue. As he can see, we've responded very quickl y, as quickly as pos sible, to get that bridge in place and it should be operating for the people in that area by this fall.

Maybe I'm being a bit optimistic - later this fall - but it should start construction this sum mer. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Ye s, to the Min ister, sooner than later, really. But could the Minister ind icate whether the planning and design of the bridge itself has been comple ted at this stage of the game, or is it still in the planning and design stage? If the planning and design has been completed on that bridge, then of course the timetable can be moved up, because it is creating major problems out there. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, as I've indicated, we've put this forward as an urgent project.

The bridge office is working on the design work now and the tenders will be prepared as soon as possible for an early tender this sum mer. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, I'm certainly not trying to be difficult. All I'm trying to do is get a little better time frame because it is a major problem out there.

When we're looking at the planning and design of the bridge, can the Minister define if that is completed or what stage is it at, and once it is completed will the tendering immediately take place? 741 The problem that we have - and I'd like to clarify that to the Mi nister maybe once again - is that we have a restriction on Highway 59 on a bridge as well. That whole corner is being cut off. The roads are allowed to have the maximum weight and the bridges are the ones that are rest ricting it and it's creating major problems for some of our bigger operators in that area.

That is why there is a - you know, I'd very much like to get maybe a bit more specific so that I can go back to the people and tell them, maybe sometime this fall, the Mi nister as well as myself will be harassed all during the summer with that. If we can maybe establish a time frame that we're looking at, more specifically, then I think we can both have some relief for the summer about the project. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, the detour that will be built to facilitate the construction of the bridge will not have weight rest rictions on it so that, for the im med ia te period, will serve that area without restrictions, so that's one positive thing.

In terms of the actual staging of the construction, the completion of the design and then the date for tendering and the closing of tenders and the start of construction, I can get all of those details to the member if he wants to make a call to the office or I can bring it forward to him within a couple of days as soon as we get to the personnel involved and determine exactly where they're at. There's no problem with getting that information. I can't give him that in detail right at this time. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: I appreciate that and I'd like it if the Min ister could, within the next period of time, bring that information forward so that I can relate that information back to the people involved. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for La Verendrye. MR. A. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

At this time I just want to und erscore what the Member for Emerson said, that bridge, believe it or not, is even causing problems for a lot of the local business people in Steinba ch who are moving products back and forth from Emerson across the line and then of course, the farmers that are hauling grain between some western points into the Stein bach and surro unding area. So I would maybe just offer a suggestion to the Minister.

If we're going ahead with that bridge and I know he's concerned about spring runoff before they put - what do they call it? - a slip or a bypass, maybe that could be put in as soon as possible before construction even starts so that we could alleviate that problem and have it going this sum mer. I would just throw that out as maybe a suggestion. That would take the pressure off this sum mer. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I did indic ate that would be commencing as soon as runoff was complete and it is, before construction. I realize the importance of this.

As I ind icated earlier, I met with th ree of the member's colleagues on this particular issue.

Wednesday, 10 April, 1815 MA. A. BANMAN: I have another question I'd like to ask of the Min ister. Highway 52 which runs through Steinbach, the eastern portion of that highway, up to the R.M. of La Broquerie border. From the R.M. of La Broquerie border running west there's about a mile that has had design work done. The acquisition has taken place; there's a rather complicated corner at the mile stretch and many of the local citizens, because of all the traffic along that road, would want a sidewalk, a bicycle path incorpo rated on one side of the road or the other.

I believe the department has had a look at it - if the Minis ter hasn't got the details here right now, but I would seriously request that design work with regard to that include a sidewalk on the north or south side of that road. lt could probably be developed along the same way as the bicycle path was developed along the No. 12 Highway and that could be done, If the design work was done to accommodate such a path.

Of course, from the town's standpoint, it would be good if the Highw ays would pave the stretch, but I'm sure that some negotiations could be undertaken with the town which would maybe see some cost-sharing or some local improvement done with regard to that area, because there are a fair number of hous es and a lot of chil dren right now travelling on bicycles on that very busy stretch of road, and the residents would appreciate the opportunity of incorporating a bicycle path with regard to that area.

I would urge the Minister to come up with a redesign which could be discussed with the local residents and with the Steinbach To wn Council and, hopefully, alleviate any of the problems and any possible accidents that could happen to childr en walking to and from school as well as toward Steinbach for just their everyday activities. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the Member for La Vere ndrye for his suggestions with regard to that section.

The design work is in the carry over program and it's being und ertaken at this time and it will take into consideration the need for a sidewalk or a path along the side. Of course, it would be the re sponsibility of the town to actually put that in place as it stands, but provisions would be made in the design for accommodating such a path as the member refers to. MA. A. BANMAN: I hesitate to mention at this time because it probably should be mentioned under the construction

section of the Estimates, but I would say to the Mi nister that of all the new construction that should be done in my constituenc y, I would put this one-mile stretch as being probably number one as a priority list. I kno w that, as a member of the Legislatur e, you stick your neck out by saying that this stretch is more imp ortant tha n some stretch maybe in La Broquerie or Ste. Anne or some other places, but I believe that this right now would be a top priority and I pass that on to the Minister. MA. CHAIRMAN: The- Member for Gla dstone. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

One of the roads I wanted to mention was No. 350 at MacG regor. Apparently, last summer there was some 742 discussion with the town of MacGregor and the R.M. of Norfolk about doing some work north and south of MacGregor on 350. As I don't see it in the program for this year, obviously you're not going to go ahead with it. Apparently there was some controversy over the relocation of the highway at MacGr egor, and I wondered if that problem had been resolved and what was going to be done with that road. lt was the southern part that was the problem. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I understand, Mr.

Chairman, that there has been some difference of opinion by the successive councils in that particular area with exactly which route they prefer. The past council had requested that it be designed for a different location than the current council is saying and that hasn't been resolved as yet. So that's one of the difficulties that we're having in that area. lt's always desirable to have the approval, as much as possible, of the local councils with regard to changes in road locations in a particular municip ality.

We haven't resolved that with them yet, as to whether the old suggestion is the one that they wish us to follow, or the new council's preferred route. MRS. C. OLESON: So is that project on hold, waiting a decision from the council, you're telling me? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, the department's preference is the original request from the previous council. it's complicated matters because the new council has taken a different position and until we can get some avenues of agreement, if possible, and pursue options with the present council, there's some delay.

But it is desirable, as I've indicated in all cases, that we do have the agreement of the council. MRS. C. OLESON: Mr. Chairman, No. 352, north of Sid ney, in the Edrans-Firdale area, I notic ed in the program there's a one-mile acquisition of right-of-way in that area. Is that the property that was In question? I asked about it last year in Estim ates and the Minister assured me that all was well, so I relaxed and thought that problem had been solved.

Obviously it hadn't, because I got some more phone calls about it and I went out to see the farm in question and certainly discovered there was a problem, and subsequently I believe the Minis ter has seen it. Has he come to any firm decision on the location of that road? HON. J. PLOHMAN: There has not been a decision to go forward with the original plans across the - I believe it was the Campbell property? MRS. C. OLESON: Ye s, Campbell. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ye s, I did go out and visit with Mr. Campbell and viewed the area and had some sympathy with his concerns.

What we have agreed to do is replace the culvert or small bridge that's required on the location as it exists now and not proceed with the relocation of the road where it was proposed, across Mr. Campbell's property. The matter is still being reviewed and Investigated by the district as to whether it's possible to find a new location straight down the

Wednelday. 10 April, 1885 right-of-way there, but the plans have not been finalized. But I think at the present time it has been resolved and that we are not proceeding. Because of the impact it would have on that particular farm, we are not proceeding as planned. The landowner is satisfie d with that, I understand . MRS. C. OlESON: Yes, it would seem to me to make • and certainly it seems to Mr.

Campbell -good sense not to cross his farm diagon ally, separating his barn from his house. 1t makes for a poor cattle operation when you have to cross a major road, particularly when there is a good, and I believe surveyed right-of-way that does not bisect his property. Also in that area, just north of Mr. Campbell's, there is an intersection with 353, which is the intersection that jogs north and then east and then south again. Is there anything in the works to straighten that road and make it go directly across, because there is right of-way there also. There doesn't seem to be any need for that jog. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I also drove that particular road when I was there and agree with the department's feelings in that area, that that should be straightened out when reconstruction takes place, so that would be the intent to improve the alignment there. Just to make sure that the understanding is correct for the record here, of course, it should be pointed out that the existing road does already bisect the property of Mr. Campbell, so ... MRS. C. OLESON: And it's causing considerable difficult y. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Yes and, of course, that's been the case for 50 or 60 years, whatever, since the farm was located there and the road was located there many years ago. So what we would be doing is trying to remedy a situation that exists already. MRS. C. OLESON: On No. 50, the road to Langruth, is there any plan or when is the plan to pave that - that new const ruction? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I believe that Is under grading and construction at the present time - that

section -and so it would have to be completed, I think it's In the carry-over for completion this year. 1t would then be consider ed in subsequent years in the program, perhaps as early as next year or within the next couple of years. MRS. C. OLESON: Now we go into, I believe it's No. 340, and the proposed bridge across the Assiniboine River. Has that bridge been designed and can we look forward to an early timetable for that construc tion? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The tim etable, I believe the member is re ferring to the new location of a bridge to take the place of the Treesbank Ferry. is that correct? MRS. C.

OLESON: Yes. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That bridge is started design. Because it had been ·under design in some years 743 previous, the requirements for a new alignment and a new road are such that there had to be a delay in the actual design of the bridge until we have firmed up the exact location in te rms of the rig ht-of-way that's required.

That is proceeding in this year's program and my plans would be to commence with the construction next year of the grading, if the acq uisition was completed and goes well, and then to have the bridge being prepared for construction concurrent with that, so that when the road is completed the bridge is also completed. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank you. I think that's ali i have. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Swan River. MR. D. GOURLA Y: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I wonder if the Min ister could ind icate what has happened to the resurfacing on Highway 83 between Benito and Swan River? · HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, I believe we have a couple of projects on Hig hway 83 on two portions of its length, but not in the location that the member is referring to. We considered that and recognize that it does requir e resurfacing, but it was not one of the final projects tha t got into the program. 1t was consider ed and is being given high priority for inclusion In subsequent programs. MR. D. GOUR LAY: With respect to -I notice in the Construction Program, on PR 588, some work is scheduled there and replacement of a bridge. What is the timetable for construction of the bridge over the Swan River on 588?

Will that be contemplated this coming winter season? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, as a result of many representations from various groups in the area and individuals over the past year, I believe the Regional Development Corporation was involved in the letter to me, as well as others, that this was necessary and a high priority.

I asked the department to proceed as quickly as possible on it and it hadn't been designed at that time but we did include it in the pre-advertising program last fall. lt has not been let to now because it had not been completely designed, but we wanted to get it started as early as possible and receive priority from the departme nt. That is the case. lt's hoped that the tendering will take place within the next couple of months and we would be able to start this summer on the construct ion. MR. D.

GOURLA Y: I believe the Minis ter ind icated yesterday that he was looking at an expanded dust control program on the provincial road syste m. I'm wondering if there is an expanded program going to be put in place this commlng summer for dust control. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'v e ind icated here, as the member has stated, that there would be an expanded dust control program this year. We have increased the program by $600,000 this year which is a substantial amount for that kind of activity. We will be establishing, within the next month or so, the

Wednesday, 10 April, 1915 priorities or the criteria for where that additional dust treatment should go. As the member is aware, the current program calls for dust treatment in front of residences within a certain distance of the roadway. We would like to see, in certain areas, that that be expanded to include additional dis tances on the roads. We may have to include the consideration of the traffic volumes and the seve rity of the situation, number of complaints received and so on with regard to certain areas of road, the accidents and hazards tha t are involved .

Also, in Northern Manitoba there would be a need for applying some stretches and intermittent ly, to allow for passing areas, where on some of the long stretches in Northern areas, there is a great problem with dust and no opportunity for people to pass. so we'll be looking at stretches in that area as well. But we haven't firmed up the criteria as to the priorities for where this additional dust control would be located, but definitely there will be an increased program this year. MR. D.

GOUR LAY: With respect to Provincial Road 366 through the Duck Mountains, can the Min ister ind icate what is on the drawing board for upgrading or improving that provincial road? HON. J. PLOHMAN: lt might be helpful if the member would specify particular sections that he's concerned about. it's quite a long

section running through portions of District 9 as well as District 8. There are several different stages of activity with regard to that. MR. D. GOU RLAY: I'm interested in 366 particularly and District 9, although it is important -the entire road through the Duck Mountain system. But I know in recent years there's been quite a bit of design and planning take place in that northern part of 366 and I'm just wondering if the Hig hways Department has decided what upgrading will take place in the immediate future in that area. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, in the vicinity of the Wellman Lake area, there's about a four and a half to five mile stretch that is being considered, that design work is being done. There's no grading contract but it's being considered for possibly next year for grading in that area, so they're in the process of the design work, survey work that's required in that area. The right-of-way has been completed, I think, in terms of the clearing -clearing of the new aUgnment has been completed.

With the final survey and design work completed, we'd be in a position to have a grading contract for upgrading there. it's rather expensive for the construction in that area. MR. D. GOURL AY: One other question that I have received a number of inquir ies about in recent years. I'm not sure whether it comes under the Department of Hig hways or whether it's under the Department of Tourism, but it's the .Manitoba signs, when you're entering Manitoba from out of the province. We don't seem to have many "Welcome to Manitoba" signs and I'm wondering, if that is being looked at by this department. 744 HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I agree that that would be a good project, a good program to improve the signage in the way the member's suggest ing, but that would have to be financed under Tourism. They're rather substantial signs that would be put in place with the assistance of the department and perhaps manufactured at the sign shop, but it would have to be a program that is initiated from the Department of Tourism and I will raise that with the Minister to determine exactly whether that's under consideration at this time. I think it's a good suggest ion.

I recognize th e inadequacy of the signage in terms of the people coming into the province. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Well. Mr. Chairman, this wasn't the subject that I was going to get on, but I'll start by helping the Mini ster out in saying that the Department of Highw ays have traditionally had welcome signs on the road and then I can tell him on Hig hway 83 coming in from the U.S. Customs, they tore down a beautiful big sign, "Welcome To Manitoba," because it wasn't bilingual. They did the same thing on Hig hway No. 3 between Gainsborough, Saskatchewan and Pierson, Manitoba.

There was a beautiful, big Manitoba sign which at taxpayers' expense was taken down, for what reason I don't know. lt does fall within the Department of Hig hways, not within Tourism. I'd suggest he clean up his act and find out what he is responsible for and what he isn't. Mr. Chairman, I will get into the area that we're discussing as far as road planning and bridges are concerned. I, as well, want to support my colleague from Gladstone in her request for the bridge between Shilo and Wawanesa. I'm aware that it is in the planning and design.

Two reasons, I think it's extremely important to put the bridge in on Hig hway 340. One is because there is a tremendous amount of financial activity on the Shilo Range with the German troops coming in, and the community south of the river, I believe, should have access to the kind of revenue that comes from the kind of personnel and the activity coming out of Shilo, and it would help the economies of the town south of the river. Secondly, there are many farmers in that whole area that could be accommodated with the building of a bridge. lt's very costly for some farmers that have land on both sides.

The current ferry system cannot carry a full load of grain, in fact, some farmers have had to transport one hopper at a time in one big truck so that it really adds to the cost of production. Third ly, on that particular bridge, I think it would be an extremely important time to build it this winter and help with job creation in that particular community. I see nothing wrong with helping southern Manitoba with employment opportunities and the building of that bridge this winter, I think, would be an extremely appropria te time. As well, Mr.

Chairman, I think that with the acquisition of property that is planned, it would appear as if he could proceed this winter. I would ask the Minister if there are any plans to proceed on that bridge this year. HON. J. PLOHMAN: First of all, I want to point out to the member that there are areas where the Department

Wedneaday, 10 April, 1815 of Highways and Transportation co-operates with the Department of To urism on signage. it is not a cut-and dried situation that it is the resp onsibility of Highways. In the case of the new Community Signage Ident ification Program, To urism, through Destination Manitoba is actually funding the first phase for signage to assist communities in showing to tourists the facilities that are available in their communities.

So there are areas of co-operation between the departments on sign age. it's possible that in some instances in the past, the Department of Highways has put signs in place for welcoming people to the province and other times it could have been under a joint program between both departments. With ref erence to the particular signs that the Member for Arthur was refer ring to, I can assure the member that no signs were removed because they are not bilingual. - (I nterjection) - Well, it's interest ing that the member would state that as if it was a fact without finding out, first of all, why it was. MA. J.

DOWNEY: it is a fact. HON. J. PLOHMAN: If he can in dicate his sources of that fact, then he should provide that information and not make a statement here. - (Int erjection) - I can tell the statement was made by the Member for Arthur not by myself. He said clearly that they were taken down for reasons that they were not bilingual and that certainly would not be the case from the point of view of any instructions given. Whether an individual at some point made a decision for whatever reaso n, maybe the sign was deteriorating and needed to be changed . . . MA. J. DOWNEY: Not just one; two, one in Swan River.

They're all torn down. Beautiful big signs of Manitoba, torn down by the Department of Hig hways. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Wel l, that's possible that some decisions were made to take some signs down. I'll find out exactly under what circu mstances they were, but I don't think it's - (I nterject ion) - So, maybe they had to be replaced but we'll look at that situation. Now, with regard to the bridge to replace the Trees bank Ferry, as I've indicated, the design work would have to be done. it's rather an extensive structure and it would not be possible to have it ready for construction this winter.

I'm aware of the importance of it and that's why we've taken the decision to go forward with replacing that ferry with a bridge. An issue that hasn't just arisen, it's been around for many years and it rather amazes me that the previous government did not make those changes when it had an opport unity to do so. However, they wer en't done. We are making those changes and impr ovements. 1 went out to Shilo and visited with the various municip alities last December, I believe.

We had a good discussion on this issue, received input, and as a result of that are proceed ing forthwith with the work that is requi red to be done in preparation for the bridge and the construction of the new location of the road. So, we are moving and we are aware of the need for that facility to serve that area. MA. J. DOWNEY: There are some specific sections of road - one specifically , is the extension of 345 between Lauder and Highway 83.

The Mi nister was kind enough to meet with a constituent of mine last winter, as well as a representative of the To wn of Melita, ind icated that he would be considering it. I see that it's not in the Highway Estimates for the planning. Has he made the decision not to consider it at all so I can report back to my constituent? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we did consider that program, as I ind icated I would at the meeting that the member refers to. I appreciated having the opport unity to meet with the Member for Arthur as well as a couple of his constituents, I belie ve. The

section is 13.3 miles and the request is for base and asphalt su rface treatment whic h would cost $900,000 to do. The traffic is only 80 vehicles per day. it can be argued, as it probably undoubtedly would be, that if the road was in better shape there'd be more traffic on it. That is certainly one argument that is made frequently with regard to roads that the department would place as a lower priority in the recommendations on the basis of the low traffic volumes. We do get those kinds of cases being made. Ho wever, the existing traffic is very low and, therefore, is one of the major reasons why we

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-4-24
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 4th hansardpdf 24.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	2f3d4ac2ff0f97899e8fd65392b6f2988c4f6a52

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