Manitoba Hansard — 24 April 1978 (Sitting 27A, 31st Legislature, 2nd Session)

31-2-27a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, April 24, 1978 Time: 2:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham (Birtle-Russell): I should like to direct the attention of the honourable members to the gallery where we have 31 students of Grade 11 standing from theW. C. Miller Collegiate. These students are under the direction of Mr. AI Schmidt. This school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Rhineland. At the same time, we have 60 students of Grade 11 standing from Churchill High. These students are under the direction of Mr. Alex Sapeski.

This school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Osborne, the Honourable Attorney-General. On behalf of all the members, we welcome you here today. Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions ... Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . HON. L. R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to make a statement to the House on the Snow Lake Medical Nursing Unit and I have copies for necessary distribution . Mr.

Speaker , during the debate on the Throne Speech , I announced that the government had decided to continue its review of the health facility construction program prepared by the previous administration . I explained that this five-year development package had an estimated capital cost of $130 million with a downstream operating cost impact of a half a billion dollars over the next 15- 20 years .

Because of our current financial situation , the government concluded that with the exception of a few key and urgent projects, it would have to defer immediate consideration of the many individual projects in this package. One of the projects that had been frozen by this decision was a proposal to build a new medical nursing unit at Snow Lake which we saw as a high priority among others. Our ongoing review of all projects included a reasssessment, in recent weeks, of the situation at Snow Lake .

This examination included included an on-site inspection by me and the Honourable Ken MacMaster, Minister of Northern Affairs of the piesent facility at Snow Lake. We found a time expired building in a state of extreme disrepair . We were dismayed by its condition which obviously had been allowed to deteriorate for the past several years. Other factors of significance in our review included: the construction of a multi-million dollar mill by the Hudson's Bay Mining and Smelting Company , creating new employment opportunities for the region .

The existence of young families in the town without available obstetrical services. The necessity now for the 1800 residents to travel by air or rough roads to receive treatment for industrial accidents, obstetrical care and general care emergency services. Circumstances at Snow Lake are urgent , severe, and unique. They involve critical medical concerns as well as the economic health and development of a large area of the North . The town of Snow Lake is working to secure medical services and the province is going to do its part .

We have authorized the building of a new medical nursing unit with office space for doctors and a fully equipped obstetrical unit. The capital costs of the project are estimated at $750,000.00. When completed in 1979, the facility will require an additional $100,000 annually in operating expenditures. The decision to proceed with the Snow Lake facility should not be construed as a change of conviction on the government's

part in respect to the overall health facility construction program . We continue to believe that we must defer that program temporarily while we take the steps necessary to reduce a substantial provincial deficit and ensure the renewed vigor of our economy . The approval of the Snow Lake project reflects a recognition of special circumstances. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. HON. LAURENT L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker , I'd like to thank the Minister for his statement. There is no doubt that we, on this side of the House, support this .

As the Minister knows, this is something that we had announced a couple of years ago . But I regret, the last paragraph certainly will not conv ince any members of this House and the members outside of the House that this was done in a very bad way. It is certainly only political interference . You have a Manitoba Health Services Commission. That is there to make sure that they would have a program of construction and maintenance of the hospitals and personal care homes so that there would not be partisan politics or pressure on government.

This Minister has stated not too long ago that they would resist pressure and now , because of the pressure, it is decided that Snow Lake will go ahead and get its hospital. I think , Mr. Speaker , that any, or most , of those that are on the list, the five-year plan that I had 1147

Monday, April 24, 1978 announced two years ago, are probably in just as bad condition or needed improvement as much as this hospital. Another factor. Mr. Speaker, is the question of the medical director, the doctors . I think that before we build hospitals, especially this government who is now going on the assumption that we have too many hospitals and too many personal care beds, and that will be one of the last priorities after highways and after many other things. I think that we have to make sure that we know if we will be able to attract doctors in the remote areas and in the north of Manitoba.

As I say, we rejoice that at least the people of Snow Lake were wise enough to put enough pressure to get their hospital. This was something that had been promised and I do hope that the Minister and his friend from the north, the representative of the area, will not interfere, and that as long as you have the Manitoba Health Services Commission, that they will determine, they'll make the proper recommendation to the priorities on which hospital!sbould be built or remodelled . Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Education. HON. KEITH A. COSENS (Gimli): Mr.

Speaker , I would like to table the Annual Report of the Department of Continuing Education and Manpower for the fiscal year 1977-78. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE (Roblin) introduced Bill No . 13,

An Act to amend

an Act to Incorporate Co operative Credit Society of Manitoba Limited MATTER OF URGENCY MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface . MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker , at this time I'd like to move a motion . You were advised, and the Clerk was given sufficient copies for the members of the government. In my motion, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St.

Johns, that this House do now adjourn to consider a definite matter of urgent public importance , namely, that the government has misled this House and the people of Manitoba through failure to make budgetary provisions, as promised in the Throne Speech, to expand the Open Heart Surgery Unit at the St. Boniface General Hospital, and by making false statements in the House and outside regarding a so-called pilot project in the Brandon area, depriving senior citizens of cards entitling them to drugs, eye glasses , hearing aids , without charge . MR. SPEAKER: The matter raised by the Honourable Member for St.

Boniface , in my opinion , is anticipatory in nature , in' that the Estimates for the Department of Health and Social Development have not as yet been examined in this Chamber , and the statement ofthe member in his motion may, in fact, be irregular. There are num8erous citations that I could have used in Beauchesne , instead, I refer the honourable member to the rules of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba , Rule 27.5(

d) in which I quote : "The Motion shall not anticipate a matter that has previously been appointed for consideration by the House, or with reference to a Notice of Mot ion, has previously been given and not withdrawn." At the same time, I refer the honourable membe r to page 3 of the Throne Speech , paragraph 8, which reads as follows: "As a further commitment to the maintenance of excellence in critical health fields , my Ministers inform me that they will be recommending budgetary initiatives through the Manitoba Health Services Commission , to expand the Open Heart Surgery Unit at the St.

Boniface General Hospital." An opportun ity for debate will be given to the honourable member when the Estimates of the Department of Health come before this Chamb er for consideration . I therefore rule the motion out of order . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR.

EDWARD SCHREYER (Rossmere): . . . that under the standing orders and rules of procedure of this Chamber, that while the matter having been raised must be ruled upon by you, Sir , I believe that the rules also clearly provide for up to five minutes for purposes of argumentation by the sponsor of the proposed motion in order to indicate to the Chair the basis for alleging urgency and so, without any way reflecting on your proposed ruling, there is a five-minute procedural provision . MR. CHAIRMAN: Very well, if that is the wish of the House, l'lllet the-honourable member explain . MR.

DESJARDINS: I find myself in a rather difficult situation when you have already announced your decision , Mr. Speaker Oh, I know you would like to dispense with it, but nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, 1 think this is quite urgent , because the privilege of this House is being abused for one thing . 1148

Monday, April 24, 1978 If we're going to this kind of information, how will we be able to do our work. You, yourself, Mr. Speaker , read the Throne Speech , where it says very clearly that budgetary initiatives will come through the Manitoba Health Services Commission, and the Minister has now stated that this is not the case. He's debating it, and in the meantime, people who have been expecting this help, cannot function . We've got one of the best heart teams in North America, or in the world .

They are ready to do the work- they haven't got the finance, and the Minister who has stated that the Budget will be decided by the administration, that there would only be 2.9 percent, is now saying that this is not the case, that they will have to find the money. It is a new program, Sir.

And, in the meantime , if we're not allowed to discuss this and ask the government what they meant and why they mislead the people by saying in the Estimates that there will be money for this- it's a new program, an expanded program- and they are now saying, "No, you go and find the money ." I think it is always urgent when there are misstatements made in this House, to try to imply that a former government was about ready to cancel these cards because they had a pilot project, and there was never such a thing as a pilot project in Brandon , Sir . There was never such a thing.

Some of those cards were cancelled by staff , without permission , by accident- I don 't know, I just found this out lately - and, Sir , as far as I'm concerned , this is not a correct statement and that is abusing the privilege of th is House . Now, if we are going to go ahead and represent the people, and be able to debate the Throne Speech and . . . We had the Throne Speech debate , and that was never brought up; I think that it is quite urgent that we should be able to discuss this at this time , Mr. Speaker . HON. WARNER H. JORGENSON, Minister without Portfolio (Morris): Mr.

Speaker, on this occasion, the members are asked to address themselves to the matter of urgency of debate, and there is nothing that my honourable friend has stated would indicate to me that at the present time there is any urgency of debate, and that's the whole purpose of this particular rule . permit members to discuss something of an urgent natu re, A MEMBER: People might die . MR. JORGENSON: Well, people might die- people are dying every day in car accidents but I don't know whether that justifies the initiating of a debate in this House .

Your decision , Sir, was certainly a correct one when you suggested that my honourable friend will have ample opportunity to discuss this matter when the Estimates of the Department of Health and Social Development are before the House, and that is the proper time to discuss it. I'm at a loss to understand, Sir, why honourable gentlemen opposite want to talk about these matters on every other item except where they 're more properly discussed and that is on the Estimates . I can 't understand why they 're afraid of the Estimates.

They use the question period- they use every other device except that which is available for them to use, and that is the consideration of Estimates . My honourable friend, if he wants to get to those Estimates I've already outlined the order in which they will appear. If he wants to expedite the Estimates that are going to be appearing before Health and Social Development they can do that and get at the department that they want to get ar. The decision is entirely up to them, Sir. Whether they choose to use it or not is up to them. MR.

SPEAKER: I might state that the arguments I have heard from the Member for St. Boniface and also from the Government House Leader have failed to change my mind in any respect. If you would like I'll read the decision again . MR. DESJARDINS: I regretfully challenge your ruling , Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Shall the ruling be sustained? A VOICE VOTE was taken , and Mr. Speaker declared the ruling of the Chair sustained . ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: Under the Orders of the Day the next item is Oral Questions . The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SCHREYER: Well , Mr.

Speaker, my first question is to the First Minister, on Page 738 of Hansard I take note that I posed a quest ion to the Minister of Finance but it is one which the First Minister subsequently replied to in part , for which I thank him .

The follow-up question is as follows : Given the reply of the Minister of Finance that he would take as notice my question askin~ for an elaboration sheet as to the total amount of funds received from Ottawa- now we were ~upphed with an elaboration sheet by the First Minister but it elaborates only to the extent of some $8 million . 1 wo uld like to ask the First Minister if, pursuant to the reply on Page 738 of Hansard , that we could have an elaboration sheet or a print-out of the fu ll information with respect to the composition in the order of $40 million that is at issue with respect to the balancing of the books at the year 's end. 1149

Monday, April 24, 1978 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. STERLING R. LYON, Premier (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker I'll be happy to take that as notice and check the reference in Hansard. If it's of any assistance to my honourable friend I think he will recall that in the course of my remarks in the Budget Debate I did give a breakdown of the 40 or $50 million figure in addition to the elaboration sheet that he has in front of him . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker , if the First Minister would please take note of Page 738, and what flows from the question answered there, I pose this question to him . Given that his remarks as recorded in Hansard do go beyond the reconciliation or elaboration sheet , but there is still an amount according to my reckoning , of between eight to twelve million that remains unreconciled . So if the First Minister has already undertaken it, he will pursue this . Thank you . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourabl e Member for Fort Rouge. MR. LLOYD AXWORTHY: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to address some questi ons to the Minister of Health and Social Services. Going back to his statement in the House on Friday concerning the eligibility of cards to senior citizens for eye glasses and prescr iptions, over the weekend he has reported to the press to have further stated that people in the programs are being subjec t to a reassessment and in his answer on Friday he indicated there was no particular change in the criteria. Could he now tell the House exactly what is the basis for the reassessment?

Are we looking at income requirements , or are we simply using the word reassessment to mean termination? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: The basis for the reassessment , Mr. Speake r, is inc ome requirements, need , equity and equitability as between the senior citizens who make up the total elderly community of our province. MR. AXWORTHY: A supplementary , Mr. Speaker . I take the Ministe r's criteria as some description , but they are not particularly informative to those who are being reassessed .

Does he mean in fact that those who have the same income requirements , who are still just receiving supplements , will no longer be in the program , and that there has to be special circumstances to justify their involvement or eligibility , or does he simply mean that the income requirements are based upon additional income over and above the exist ing old age pension and the supplements they receive? MR. SHERMAN: No, Mr. Speaker , the situation is that there were several hundred senior citizens who held social allowances health services cards , as the member knows .

Some of them simply held cards of that nature , some of them actually were on social allowances and received cash benefits, as well as holding those cards . The majority of senior citizens in our province , not all of them by any means' but certainly the majority , by the time they reach the age of 65 and qualify for the income support programs that are in place , such as Old Age Security Guaranteed Income Supplement and , in cases of need, the Manitoba Supplement for the Elderly, move into a category where they no longer necessarily qualify for social allowance assistance .

Now there are certainly special cases and special circumstances where , because of income and living situations, individual people even in that category still deserve morally and ethically , special consideration , and they will be given special considerat ion . There will be no hardship permitted under this program. What we have simply done is advised those 2,700 senior citizens that their SAHS cards are not being automatically renewed ; they have in fact not been reviewed for three years, the cards of those particular 2,700.

They are not being automatically renewed , but their cases are all open to individual assessment , and there will be no hardship permitted for any of them . MR. AXWORTHY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

If in the case of the reassessment , which I assume is being done by department officials , I would ask the Minister if there is any recourse to an appeal procedure on the judgment of a department official ; can the senior citizen affected by this reassessment go to the Welfare Advisory Board or some other body to appeal the judgmen t that is being made by an official , so that there is that recourse of reconsideration and some degree of, and will it be done in some form of tribunal or open form? MR. SHERMAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker . I will give my honourable friend that firm undertaking .

And while I'm on my feet I will just answer his question perhaps a little more fully with respect to the point of equity and equitability which I may not have explained very well.

But the point is, Sir, that there are approximately 100,000 senior citizens in this province, and there are approximately 2,700 who, some of them , qualify for special social allowance privileges and support because they hold cards that t_he other 97 and a half thousand, or 96 and a half thousand don't hold , and yet many , many of the semor citizens now are all in the same income category , because of the support programs they go on to at age 65. So there is an element of equity and equitability involved , and this is the implication of my 1150

Monday, April 24, 1978 initial response to my honourable friend. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface . MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker , to the Minister of Health , isn't it a fact, Sir , that there are also quite a few thousand of these same people that are in personal care homes. Now they are getting something that the- others aren't getting. Now- is my honourable friend suggesting that this would no longer be covered by the hospitalization plan?- it's the same situation .

Is my honourable friend also suggesting that it's not the right thing to do to discourage people to go on welfare, just give them what they need. And finally , when these questions are answered , I would like to request the Minister of Health , who certainly has been given the wrong information , to withdraw the statement that he has made in this House, that there had been ordered by the former government a pilot project in Brandon , because I assure him that that is not the case. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Speaker , if I may take the question in reverse order and I hope my memory doesn't fail me along the path , but with respect to question number three, I will certainly check my statement. I don 't think I said that the withdrawal or the pilot project was ordered by the former government - I said it occurred under the former government. It's my information that the Department of Health and Social Development in that region dur ing the life of the past administration , did undertake a pilot project in the Brandon area, a test program which produced virtual ly no fallout.

That's the information I've been given from my department officials . Secondly , Sir , with respect to the situation in personal care homes , the resident of a personal care home receives certain services in this area free of charge anyway , as the honourable member well knows- for example, drug services in personal care homes. Certa inly there is still the difficulty of meeting living needs and living costs for those of us who go beyond the age of 65 and are not in ,. personal care homes .

Those cases will be judged individua lly and I give my honourable friend the undertaking that no hardship will be permitted . But the program that is in place will be universal in its equity and proved to be satisfactory in the test project that was undertaken in Brandon . MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker , my honourable friend certainly misunderstood the question . It's exactly the case. I think that he stated that everybody should be treated the same and he singled out 2,700 people that had something that others didn 't get. Now , my question .. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Government House Leader . MR.

JORGENSON: On a point of order . I wonder on what provisions of the rules that you 're permitting this debate to carry on at this stage . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface have a question? MR. DESJARDINS: My question, Mr. Speaker , is this : Is it the intention of government then to withdraw from the insured program under hospitalization , not free but part of it is free, arrangements for senior citizens in personal care homes and 8 also for those that are receiving home care because doesn't he think, Mr. Speaker, that all this is part of the same program.

There's many programs to help different people with different needs, isn't that a fact? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . MR. SHERMAN: Well , the answer to the first question is no, Mr. Speaker , and the answer to the second question is yes. This is part and parcel of that application of fairness and equitability across that whole spectrum of programs and services . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the Minister of Health is to ask whether the Minister can tell us when he will be in a position to provide or table the actual detailed criteria that will be used . The Min ister has used terms very frequently today of equ itability and moral and ethical , etc ., all of which are obviously subjective terms . Can the Minister advise then when he will have the specific numerical and related criteria? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . MR.

SHERMAN: I can't g ive the Leader of the Opposit ion a specific date on that other than to say that I will certainly deal with it in my Estimates, Mr. Speaker . I'll certa inly make that available in my Estimates . . While I'm on my feet , I'd like to respond to a quest ion that was asked to me by the Leader of the Opposition on April 20th , having to do with directors of patient services in a number of Winnipeg hospitals . The Leader of the Opposition asked me whether they had written to the district offices of 1151

Monday, April 24, 1978 my department indicating that the withdrawal of social worker service from the hospitals has resulted in a deterioration of patient care quality . The answer to the question , Mr. Speaker, is an emphatic no, there has been no such information written , indicated or conveyed . Furthermore, I am advised by my department that social work service is picked up by others in the field if in the event of attrition or transfer, there are changes in personnel that develop or take place . But the basic answer to the Leader of the Opposition 's question is no, Sir . MR.

SCHREYER: When the Minister of Health says that the answer is emphatically no, may I ask the Minister does he mean that he is not aware that any such letter or letters have been written or that in fact he is aware that no such letter has been written by directors of patient care services of Winnipeg area hospitals to the directors of Community Services in the southwest and north the east region? MR. SHERMAN: Well , Mr. Speake r, I remind the honourable ~entleman that his question to me was whether I had received indication of such . The answer to that 1s an emphatic no.

I would say further that my staff is a capable and competent one that keeps me well posted on developments, particularly at the present time in a per iod of restraint and budgetary responsibi lity, and I suggest that this question of the Honourable Leader of the Opposition falls into much the same category as many of his questions in this area since the opening of this session , Sir. They contain implication, suggestion, hint and innuendo and are based in no way on any substantive fact. MR. SCHREYER: A supplementary , Mr. Speaker .

I will refrain from commenting on the last few sentences of the Minister 's answer .

I am merely asking the Honourable Minister a question and that is, will the Minister undertake to find out from his district offices- because his answer rather implies that he may not have ascertained - will the Minister undertake to make specific and deliberate inquiry of the Winnipeg southwest and northeast district offices of Community Services Sivision of the Department of Health to ascertain whether either or both of those offices have received letters from the director oi patient care services at such hospitals as Victoria, Concordia and Grace, any one of the three or all three , indicating in writing, that the quality of patient care services has deteriorated as a result of the withdrawal of certain support services to the hosp ital by the district office of Community Services?

Will the Minister find out? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker' I have found out. This question was asked of me last Thursday . My staff investigated it for me on Thursday and Friday . I will continue to monitor the situation . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk . MR. HOWARD PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker , my question is to the Minister of Health and Social Development. Would the Minister confirm that due to extreme budgetary cutbacks that it has become necessary for various hospitals throughout the province to discontinue service on Saturdays and Sundays pertaining to cafeteria service to their staff? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . MR. SHERMAN: No, Mr. Speaker , I can't confirm that. I suppose it's in the same category as that two meals a day question for which the department and the government and the province have no responsibility. MR. PAWLEY: Would the honourable member be prepared to receive this memorandum which has been distributed to staff at the Selkirk General Hospital which' in fact, indicates that that very fact has occurred due to extreme budgetary cutbacks by the Provincial Government? MR. LYON: Take it up with the Board. The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. RUSSELL DOERN: Mr.

Speaker, like everyone else, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Health. I would like to ask the Minister of Health about his speech, I'd like to ask him a question about his speech on volunteerism . Is this an attempt to substitute volunteers for full-time staff and , secondly , is this also a recognition of the need for certain services and programs and their value to the people of this province? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . MR. SHERMAN: Neither , Mr. Speaker.

It's a program aimed at harvesting, recruiting and utilizing the talent and the spirit of giving that is possessed by so many Manitobans and that has been blunted, frustrated and stultified under eight years of big government. MR. DOERN: Well , since I didn 't get an answer, I'll try another question . Mr. Speaker, could the Minister indicate where he would draw the line in an attempt to replace full-time staff with volunteers? Where would he draw the line? For example, would he substitute a bucket-brigade for a 1152

Monday, April 24, 1978 fire department or a posse for a police force? MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker , I would be willing to entertain any colorful suggestions, any innovative suggestions that the Honourable Member for Elmwood wishes to direct to me. This is a policy approach that my department and I are workir.g on in concert with my colleagues in government at the present time . It will be announced when it's fully formulated and finalized , and I would hope that would be well in advance of next year's Estimates review . MR. DOERN : Mr. Speaker , a final question.

I assume that one of the bases of this policy is the attempt to save money and cut costs . I would like to ask the Minister whether he or his government favours an expansion of private schools over the public school system , or an expansion of private hospitals or clinics over public hospitals and facilities . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Health . Could the Minister indicate if he has it in mind and will in fact be preparing to eventually table certain numerical data or quantification with respect to this program of volunt eer effort?

I ask the question in light of the fact that there has always been a signif icant amount of volunteer effort, here and everywhere else in Canada, in the Red Feather and related 8health and welfare services field , can the Minister indicate if he has in mind then to quantify and table the results of such quantification? MR. SHERMAN: The Honourable Minister of Health . MR. SHERMAN: Well , certainly , Mr. Speaker, I would expect that that would be possible, and I would be happy to do that when ou r program in that respect is fully defined and ready to go into place .

I can only say to the Honourable Leader of the Opposition that wherever and whenever I've spoken of volunteerism , including the Red Cross annual meeting on Saturday morning, but also in many other places, my remarks have met with a very gratifying response and enthusiasm on the part of the public , which indicates to me that the volunteer and the spirit of the volunteer has not been used to the extent that he or she has desired in recent years . MR. SCHREYER: Well , Mr.

Speaker , that bespeaks another supplementary question . ls the Minister wishin g to say that he is making his decisions and determination on the basis of the response that his speeches evoke? Because if that is the basis , then I can tell him that I have made speeches on the spirit of volunteerism as well , and they got very positive response . So what's my honourable friend suggesting? MR. SHERMAN: No, Mr. Speaker, the response did not come first and the speech second; the speech came first and the response came after . MR. SCHREYER: So what else is new?

I presume that a speech has to be made before there can be a response. Mr. Speaker , my question is, in the absence of the Minister of Northern Affairs , to the Acting Minister responsible for the fisheries resource in Manitoba . May I ask the Acting Minister , the Minister of Mines and Resources , to indicate, or to take as notice , whether there are any discussions or any substance relating to a news story of last week emanating from Ottawa to the effect that the Government of Canada was prepared to transfer or sell its interest in the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation to the three prairie provinces .

Can the Minister indicate if there is any substance to that, or will he take it as notice? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines . HON. BRIAN RANSOM (Souris-Killarney): I'll take that question as notice, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns . MR. SAUL CHERN lACK: Thank you , Mr. Speaker . I'd like to direct a question to the Acting Minister of Finance , and direct him to page 738 of Hansard , wherein I asked for some information .. . MR. SPEAKER: Order please . May I suggest to the honourable member that there have been questions asked about that already , I believe by . .. MR.

CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker , if you would hear me out, you would find that there weren't any questions asked about that. MR. SPEAKER: Very well. The honourable member proceed . MR. CHERNIACK: I asked for certain information which I thought would be possible to obtain , and the Honourable the First Minister , on behalf of the Minister of Finance , took it as notice . Would the 1153

Monday, April 24, 1978 Honourable Acting Minister please look into that question so that when the Minister of Finance returns he may be able to supply the information? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs . HON. EDWARD McGILL {Brandon West): Yes, Mr. Speaker , I'd be pleased to do that. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns . MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, on8question to the Honourable e Minister of Health and Social Development.

In the instructions which have been given to review all of these some 2,700 cards that we referred to earlier, there must have been guidelines , written instructions, as to how they are to be assessed in that subjective way, of moral , ethical, and equitable consideration . Would he favour us tomorrow with a copy of the instruction and guidelines which must have been distributed? MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker , I can certainly favour the honourable member with the text of the letter that went out. That doesn 't cover the entire subject by any means , but I can certainly do that.

I give my honourable friend the undertaking that I gave him a few moments ago , that there will be no hardship permitted, and that I will hold myself personally responsible for ensuring that the program is administered equitably . MR. CHERNIACK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Just as a supplementary, then . The Honourable Minister suggests that the letter which went out is not fully descriptive of the guidelines. That being the case, could he inform us how the inspectors or assessors of need , in this case , will be guided if they don 't have a specific form of guideline to direct them? MR.

SHERMAN: Well, they'll be guided by me, Sir. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Thank you , Mr. Speaker. I'd like to address a question to the Minister of Industry and Commerce, and ask him a question relating to the recently signed Federal-Provincial Industrial Development Agreement which, I might add , Mr. Speaker , has a very familiar ring to it in terms of objectives and techniques .

The $3.5 million, that is, the approximate $3.5 million Manitoba share per annum which is to be paid out in co-operation with the Federal Government over five years, is this amount of funding totally over and above the moneys which are included in the Eestimates of the Department of Industry and Commerce for this year, or are some of those funds already included in the Estimates, for instance, such as the $200,000 included under Technology, or the $235,600 included under Small Enterprise Development? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce . HON. ROBERT {Bob) BANMAN {La Verendrye): Mr.

Speaker , the negotiations are going on right now with regard to what particular items will be covered by the new agreement. The half-a-million dollars for this first year is under negotiation , but I would say is more than likely going to be above the moneys that have been voted in the Estimates . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Well, if these are new moneys, could the Honourable Minister indicate just where we will find these moneys, or sources for these moneys , in the Estimates? Or will there be supplementary Estimates introduced in the House? MR.

BANMAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Once we finalize a figure , it would have to be supplementary . MR. EVANS: The last question, Mr. Speaker , then . Would the Honourable Minister favour the House with a copy of the agreement? Would the Honourable Minister table a copy of the agreement? -(Interjection)- Oh , he did . I'm sorry. Thanks . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. MR. HARVEY BOSTROM: Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Acting Minister of Resources, or to the Premier , whoever can answer the question I posed last week , which I believe was taken as notice regarding the Ferry Barge Service to the communities of Bloodvein and Princess Harbour . Can they answer whether or not this service will continue this year? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker , I regret , because of a death in the family , the Minister of Natural Resources is not able to be with us today . I remember the honourable member's question and I'll 1154

Monday, April 24, 1978 endea~our to get an answer to him shortly . MR. BOSTROM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I thank the First Minister for his reply to the question. My next question is to the MinisterofTourism . l would like to ask him if he will be tabling his report regarding the condominium issue in Whiteshell this week? MR. BANMAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker . Very shortly . MR. BOSTROM: Mr. Speaker , supplementary, do I take it that the Minister is making commitment to table it this week in the Legislature? MR. BANMAN: Mr. Speaker, soon. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. SIDNEY GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question to the Minister of Tourism . It is indicated that there will be additional support for the Assiniboine Park Zoo to the extent of approximately $300,000.00. Would the Honourable Minister advise whether that is in the Estimates, or whether it will be by way of supplementary supply? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney General. HON. GERALD W.J. MERCIER (Osborne): Mr.

Speaker , there is additional funding of ap proximately $280,000 to $285,000 over and above what was previously indicated to the City of Winnipeg ; $215,000 has been appropr iated from the Urban Affairs Budget from last year , and approx imately $73,000 will have to be provided by way of supplementa ry estimates this year. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I would just like the Honourable Min ister to explain what item of the Estimates will be reduced in terms of Urban Affairs to make up for the balance of the $200,000.00? MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker , these were funds that were available in the Urban Affairs Budget last year for various studies, that were not spent , and we will be using the additional funds to the City of Win nipeg for the Assiniboine Park and Zoo , Sir . I would say that the review that was conducted by the off icials in the Department of Tourism and Recreation with the City would indicate that with these add itional funds , there will be year-around public access to the park and zoo. MR. GREEN: Well , Mr.

Speaker , given the fact that the money is not in the current Estimates of expenditures, I would like to ask the First Minister whether , in fact , within one week of the Budget being adopted we now know that current expend itures- in seven days- have increased by some $4 million a year ; $3,800,000 under the Department of Industry and Commerce, and another $270,000 under the Minister of Tourism, within one week - $4 million a week . Is that correct? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . MR. LYON: Mr.

Speaker , I think there will be an appropriate time , as my honourable friend is well aware, when the Estimates are being discussed , where he can discuss the particular votes under the particular items that he is concerned about with respect to the Department of Urban Affairs , and/or the Department of Tourism . However , Mr. Speaker , coming from a government such as he did, I don't think anyth ing should surprise him in terms of financial manipulation , because we were left with lots of it. GOVERNMENT BILLS - SECOND READINGS MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day .

On the Adjourned Debates on Second Reading on the proposed motion of the Honourable Attorney General. The Honourable Government House Leader . MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Speaker, will you call Bill No. 4 and Bill No. 9? BILL NO.4-

AN ACT TO AMEND THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ACT MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney General. MR. MERCIER presented Bill No. 4,

an Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act , for second reading MOTION presented. MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for an explanation . The Honourable Attorney General. 1155

Monday, April 24, 1978 MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, at the 1977 Session of the Legislature , the previous government introduced legislation to provide for roadside suspensions . There are a nu mber of new members who will not be familiar with that legislation , but that legislation was tied into the use of an alert machine , which I am advised is the only approved roadside screening device, and the breathalyzer machine, where a driver was to be stopped by the police at the roadside and subm it a sample of his breath to the police , the alert machine registers either pass, warn or fail.

Those who register fail are required to take a breathalyzer test , and their driving privileges will be suspended for 12 hours . Those who register warn will have their driver priv ileges suspended for 12 hours . Those who register pass will be allowed to proceed . The legislation , Mr. Speaker, did not allow for any discretion to the Police Officer . Once he had made the determination to demand that the driver submit a sample of his breath for analysis and the roadside screening device , was that the results of the test that determine whether or not the license was to be suspended .

The device was calibrated to register warn , where the proportion of alcoho l in the driver's blood is at least 50 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood . The machine was calibrated to register fail when the proportion was 100 milligrams in 100 millilitres of blood . The 50 milligram level does constitute legal impairment in several other countries ., Mr. Speaker. Since then, however , legislation was passed but was never proclai med.

The City of Winnipeg police force and the RCMP expressed concern that the legislation , in its present form , requires the police to administer a test to a driver under suspension , at any time , upon request of the driver , and in effect this could mean that a driver under a roadside suspension , could indicate to a police officer more than two hours after the suspension that he wanted to submit to a breathalyzer test or another test to determine the proportion of alcohol in his blood .

The police off icer would be required to take such steps as are necessary to have the test carried out as soon as poss ible, but even if the analysis indicated that the suspended driver was impaired , no action could be taken against the driver because more than two hours had elapsed since he had been observed by the police. And the police concern is that they would be required to foresake other duties and responsibilities while they attended to this demand.

The new Subsection 23818 provides that the driver may forthwith request and voluntarily submit to a test, and in effect the driver still has the right to demand a breathalyzertest , but the test would be administered at that time, and the driver would run the risk of being charged under the impaired driving provisions of the Criminal Code if he failed the breathalizer test. The new Subsection 23812 provides for suspension of drivers who fail the breathalyzer test or register over .05, indicating the driver may present a danger to other persons on the road .

Previously, if a driver requested the breathalyzer test and was still shown to be somewhere between .05 and 1.00. The mere fact that he had taken the test would allow him to get his licence plate back right at that moment, which is contrary to those who voluntarily submit to turn in their driver's licence so that there was a discrepancy in the manner in which those people were treated. There are some other minor amendments relating to subsection 9, relating to return of the licence. The driver may simply indicate an address other than the address shown on his licence for mailing purposes.

Subsection 12 has been amended to permit the Registrar to consider a record of roadside suspensions but these records may not be used in any prosecution other than a prosecution for driving while the driver's licence is suspended. Those, Mr. Speaker , are briefly the chances that have been made in the legislation that was passed at the last session but not proclaimed which have been reviewed with the enforcement officers and which we believe can make this particular lawmore workable and equitable law . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker , I beg to move , seconded by the Honourable Member for St. Johns, that debate be adjourned . MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 9 -

AN ACT TO AMEND THE MORTGAGE BROKERS AND MORTGAGE DEALERS ACT MR. McGILL presented Bill No.9,

An Act to Amend the Mortgage Brokers and Mortgage Dealers Act, for second reading. MOTION presented. uMR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister . MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker , prior to 1976, the Mortgage Brokers8 and Mortgage Dealers Act and also the Real Estate Brokers Act were administered by the Public Utilities Board and the Public Utilities Board Act therefore applied to any hearings or other proceedings before the board. Part of the last-named Act empowered the board to order any party to any proceedings to pay all or part of the costs thereof . This power could be used in two different ways .

First , in proceedings in which two or more parties were involved, the Board could order an unsuccessful party to pay the costs of a successful party and , secondly, and more importantly , the board could order a party to pay the board's own costs. Thus, in hearings into the conduct of a registered broker or salesman, thiS power 1156

Monday, April 24, 1978 could be used to order him to pay all or part of the board's costs at the hearing if the board considered that his conduct justified the imposition of this penalty . Not only is this a salutary penalty in some cases, but it also shifts the burden of the expense of the hearings from the taxpayers onto the person whose conduct has prompted the hearings . When the administ ration of the Mortgage Brokers! and Mortgage Dealers Act and of the Real Estate Brokers!

Act was trans ferred from the board to the Securities Commission in 1976, the Public Utili ties Board Act, of course, ceased to be appl icable and a number of changes had to be made in those two Acts and in the Security Act as a result. The power to order one party to pay the costs of anothe r in any hearing before the Comm ission was preserved by an amendment made to one

Section of the Secur ities Act , but the power to order payment of the Commission 's own costs was accidentally lost , Mr. Speaker , in this change. Although the Securit ies Act already conta ins such a power, it only applies to persons who are registered under that Act. The present situation , therefore , is that the Commission can order a person registered under the Secur ities Act to pay the costs caused by a complaint against him but lacks the power to make a similar order against a person registered under the Mortgage Brokers and Mortgage Dealers Act or the Real Estate Brokers Act.

The purpose of this amendment , Mr. Speaker, is to remedy this so far as the Mortgage Brokers and Mortgage Dealers! Act is concerned by adding to it a new

Section which is similar in all respects to the Sect ion referred to in the Securiti es Act. uMR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns . MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker , I wanted to ask a quest ion of the Honourable Minister. Could the Honou rable Minister indicate what appeal provision there is from a decis ion of the Commission under this

Section to orde r payment of moneys? MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker, I'll be pleased to advise that information for the member . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan . MR. PETER FOX: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Inkster that debate be adjourned . MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Speaker , I move, seconded by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs 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 of Supply with the Honourable Member for Radisson in the Chair for the Department of Mines and Natural Resources and the Honourable Member for Crescentwood in the Chair for the Department of Agriculture . SUPPLY - AGRICULTURE MR. CHAIRMAN, Mr. Warren Steen: Come to order . When we left off on Friday last, we were on Page 11 of the Estimates Book , Item 10. Manitoba Water Services Board . IO.(

b) Other Expenditures , under the Water Services Board . For clarification, the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. A.R. (Pete) ADAM: Yes. I was away Friday afternoon . MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. We are on IO.(

b) under Manitoba Water Services Board . MR. ADAM: Item (a)? MR. CHAIRMAN: No, Item (b). We held (

b) at the closing hour . Okay? MR. ADAM: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay . The Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. SAMUEL USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman , I would like the Minister to tell us just whether there's any change in the government 's policy with respect to bonding, tendering , the whole process of letting contracts . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture . 1157

Monday, April 24, 1978 HON. JAMES E. DOWNEY (Arthur): Mr. Chairman, there is no change in that procedure . MR. USKIW: Is it the intent to keep the same policy as it was, or . .. ? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . It has been left with the Board and there are no changes, just that they have decided to leave it as it was. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Thank you , Mr. Chairman. I would like to know whether any change in policy in regard to setting up classification of communities which qualify for water services . ..

I believe past practice has been to classify towns under classification as 1, 2, and 3, the result of which, by the time that you get to No. 1, and the second classification is processed , you 'd never get down to No. 3. I would like to know if there 's any change in that policy . MR. DOWNEY: That is, in regard to the policy towards . MR. ADAM: Classifying the different towns. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , I believe the member is referring to population numbers , which ones we propose to service . MR. ADAM: Priorities . MR. DOWNEY: Yes, prior ities.

We're attempting to service the medium and low priorities at some a year. We feel it's important that they too have the water services provided for them, but it will not change too much as it has been in the past. The Board will be concerned about the low population areas, but it is our intent to try and service as many of those lower priorities as possible , or lower populated towns . MR. ADAM: Yes.

I think that in the past the low priority , the No. 3 priority, have very seldom been able to avail themselves to any assistance from the province to get water, and I would like to suggest that we remove the third priority , the low priority , into a classification of its own , and reclass ify that group into 1, 2, 3, the third priority , the low priority , and allocate so much funds forth at classification. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture . MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , it is our intent and the board's intent to set the low priority , the low populated areas aside as a special group and try and deal with as many of them as we can , and not have them included as the total classification with the high and medium priority that we do in fact tend to treat them as special cases under priorities of their own . MR. ADAM: Are you going to set the low priorities up, have their own priorities as well- the third category , we'll say. The first priority, the second priority , they will be on their own . MR. DOWNEY: That's right.

The lower populated ones will be in a separate category . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , I tried to determine the other day the capital amount for Water Services Board and I am not sure that we got that answer . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , that comes under No. 11, Acquisition and Construction. MR. USKIW: I appreciate that, but just to perhaps recap, I think it was discussed last week . The amount you have here, Sir, is only 375,000. That hardly represents a program. MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , it's in budgeti ng procedure that the moneys will be placed into the budget year- the year that we are proposing to spend the money- that it will not be placed a year ahead and then spent in that manner. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , I am not sure that we are any more clear on it. What is the amount of capital that we intend to use in the program in this fiscal year , then? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the amount estimated to be spent this year in capital grant , will be $3.581 million . MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman . I presume that is the amount still unused of the allocations of the past.

There are no new allocations other than what we see here . Am I correct? 1158

) Monday, April 24, 1978 MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Cha irman, with the 40 some proposals , we have all that the department and all that can be handled this coming year when the moneys are in place for that ... MR. USKIW : Mr. Chair man, is the Min ister tell ing us that with the moneys that are still unused , that they are sufficient to carry out a full year 's program , that we don 't have a capacity to handle more than that amount of volume of wo rk, related to the amount of funds still in the allocation from last year? MR.

DOWNEY: Sir , that is the amount of work to be done will covered by the moneys that were allocated from last year's ... Mr. Chairman , there is a carry-over to cover this year's 40 projects and the new projects will be applied for subject to approval. MR. USKIW: I appreciate the difficulty the Min ister is having ; I'm not trying to make it rough for him . Perhaps he should caucus with his Deputy Minis ter. MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , we have the moneys allocated from the carry-over from last year to complete this year's projects and we do have a carry-over from that to also enter into some of next year's projects. MR. USKIW: What is the total amount of carry-over? MR. DOWNEY: The total amount of carry-over fo r this year's projects were 3.58 million , and the carry -over from that will be 1.867. MR. USKIW: You 're talki ng abou t two carry -overs , Mr. Cha irman ? You're talking about two amou nts as a carry-over .

Oh , I'm sorry , is the Minister saying then that we will still have to carry part of that over into the next fiscal year? - (Inter jection)- All right, Mr. Chairman , in that context then , it seems that there is money available .

We were attempt ing to change policy last year with respect to a numbe r of communities that were always priorized at the bottom of the list and a thought was given to the idea of allocating spec ific amounts to different priority groups , so that they would have in fact a budget of their own , rathe r than dropping off to the bottom of the line each time because some higher priori ty community decided to launch into a second or a third project, while the bottom line co mmunit y hadn 't had its first one .

So we were thinking in terms of setting up two or three components and allocat ing funds by component , so that these bottom line or low prior ity commun ities would not be left on the outside for an indefinite period of time . MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, as I indicated to the MemberforSte . Rose, we do uaveaspecial category of low populated areas that did always fall into the bottom end and never did seem to surface .

We have seven proposed projects for the coming year that fall into that category for the 1978 .. . that we have in fact treated them as spec ial priorities within themselves , that they do not continue to stay at the bottom of the list. We have in fact made an effort to and will be proceeding on that basis . MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, in that case could the Minister leave with us a document showing the list of priority communities in their batting order , so to speak , for the current fiscal year and the following one? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , I could have the board provide that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St.

Johns . MR. CHERN lACK: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . I believe I understood the Minister to be explaining the expend iture under the next resolution as being applied to the Water Services Board . Is that correct? He was talking about approximately about $5 million worth of carry-over , and I assume that that is related to the next item , Acquisition , Construction and Physical Assets . Is that correct? So that the moneys under the next resolution, Resolution No. 18, will be expended under the direction of the Manitoba Water Services Board . Is that correct? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture. MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , no, it is not correct. That money will not be expended under the board . MR. CHERN lACK: Well then, it is not part of that $5 million that you were talking about earlier. You were talking about a different. . . -(Interjection)- I know , Mr. Chairman, I don't want to go into that unless that is part of the expenditures of the Water Services Board and since I now assume that it is .. . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , no, the 37o that is being questioned at this point is not part of the capital projects that are in place in carry-over moneys for this year's projects. 1159

Monday, April 24, 1978 MR. CHERNIACK: Well then, Mr. Chairman, I would like to know specifically what carry forward moneys are available . Now that we are going into a combined capital and current , I want to know what capital moneys are available from previous authorities . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the carry-over from the last projects come to 5.448 million dollars . MR. CHERNIACK: I want to know where is the authority for that money . MR. DOWNEY: That was carr ied forward from last year 's budget , Mr. Chairman, and reconfirmed by management committee . MR. CHERN lACK: Mr.

Cha irman , if you say carried forward from last year's budget, you can't mean current budget. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , it's

Schedule A Capital. MR. CHERN lACK:

Schedule A. All right then, I come back and I ask, what items are they? Are they 1977, 1976, 1975? Which

schedule are they from? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman . It says the accumulated capital from the three years . MR. CHERNIACK: Now that would be self-sustaining moneys ,

Schedule A is self-sustaining moneys . Mr. Chairman , I don't think we need it now , although if it's available now, fine, but could we get a

summary now of the moneys expended in the last fiscal year under Schedul e A, and the moneys available now under

Schedule A, allocated to the years when they were authorized? If you don't have it now , as long as we'll get it. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , we do not have that information . MR. CHERN lACK: All right , but we will get it. Well then, Mr. Chairman , I want to know then, is the total available funds out of

Schedule A in the figure you gave, two figures , which total about just over $5 million? Is that all there is? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, that is correct , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHERNIACK: Is it the intention of the Minister to ask for more

Schedule A money, capital funds, in this year? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , not for this year . It will be requested in the construction year of the project. MR. CHERN lACK: Well , does that mean that there will not be any construction year , this year , other than the amounts already accumulated in authority . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture. MR. DOWNEY: That is correct. MR. CHERNIACK: And also , the authority that is available will not be fully spent in this year . MR. DOWNEY: That is correct. MR.

CHERN lACK: Finally , could we know how much was spent out of that in this last fiscal year? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the department does not have that figure here, but we can provide it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George, did you .. . ? MR. BILLIE URUSKI: Yes, Mr. Chairman , I do. I just wanted to make sure that I understood the Minister correctly when he spoke to the Member for St. Johns about the available capital. Is the capital that is being used by the Department for this year, that is all that is being requested , that is shown in the authority from last year?

You are not anywhere else in your Departmental Estimates asking for further sums of capital expenditure? MR. CHAIRMAN: Min ister of Agriculture. MR. URUSKI: No, no. I'm not saying for water services , I'm saying for the entire Department of 1160

Monday, April 24, 1978 Agriculture . Because I think that was the question that was being posed by the Member for St. Johns . I think he was relating to the entire department, and maybe that was taken wrong . The point that I am asking now is, yes, you have capital for water services , what other capital is the department employing for this year that may not be shown, and could we have that broken out? MR. CHAIRMAN: To the Member for St. George , would that not be under 11, the Other Capital? MR. URUSKI: That's my very point, Mr. Chairman . If I understood the Member for St.

Johns' question , I don't think it was understood by the Minister in that same light. They were referring specifically to Water Services Board, and the question that I asked for, is there any other capital that is being requested by the Department of Agriculture for this year's spending, either from previous authorities , or asking for new authority this year , over and above what is being mentioned for the Water Services Board? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture . MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , it has been indicated to me that the next capital requirement is listed in this next item, and that is the capital for the whole department. 4MR. URUSKI : That's the full picture then , for the entire- the $375,000 in Vote 18 plus the authority on the Water Services . Okay . Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Mr. Chairman , on the projects for water services, I believe the Minister mentioned 40 projects . Was that the total? Does this 40 include the seven low priority , or are the seven low priorities in addition to the 40? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture . MR.

DOWNEY: No, Mr. Chairman , they do not include the other items, the other ones that we were talking about in the low priority . MR. ADAM: They 're over and above? Now , there are no new additional funds, I understand, that this carry-over from last year 's projects and the year before - there are no new additional funds? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, as I indicated, the only other additional funds are those in the next item, in item 18. MR. ADAM: That is the only additional -this means , then, there's going to be a slowdown in the high and second priorities? MR. DOWNEY: No, that is not correct, Mr. Chairman .

There will not be a slowdown . The department will be taking requests , as it has done in the past, for the construction of water systems and sewage, as it has in the past. There has been no slowdown ; they continue to expand . ln fact, some of the lower priority areas that have been listed here- there 's an indication from myselfthat we do plan to expand and we will be dealing with those requests in next year 's Budget. MR. ADAM: Mr.

Chairman, in view of the fact that there is only $375,000 that's coming up on the next item, as an increase, and since we are bringing in the low priorities which have never been able to get into any of the programs, and considering the fact that there are increased costs of probably 7 to 9 percent caused by inflat ionary processes, how then can the Minister say that we are going to continue with the same programs if we are taking on a third category , a low priority- we're bringing them in and we are not putt ing in any significant amounts of additional capital- how then can we say that we're going to continue on as in the past?

MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, as I have indicated, we do not plan to cut back, in fact , we would hope that we could carry on with the program as it has been and with an inclusion of more of the lower priorities , the new projects to be considered will come in on the budgeting of 1979 and 1980; that is the time that the budgeting for those will be discussed with members opposite . MR. ADAM: When can we get the list of the proposals for this year , for 1978-79? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the proper time would be when we're dealing with the government capital items.

However , I've indicated that we can make the list available to the members in fairly short order . MR. ADAM: Yes. I understood the Minister to give a commitment that he would provide the list, 1 am just wondering when we are going to get it, that's all. MR. DOWNEY: As I indicated , Mr. Chairman, I hope to be able to provide it very soon . I will request 1161

Monday, April 24, 1978 it from the Board and will provide it for the members opposite. MR. CHAIRMAN: IO.(b)-pass. 10.-pass. Resolution 17-Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $722,200, Manitoba Water Services Board-pass . Item 11, Acquis iti on/ Construct ion of Physical Assets. The Member for St. Johns . MR. CHERN lACK: Thank you , Mr. Chairman. I wonder if the Honourable Minister could give us a breakdown of this expenditure of some $375,000, I believe it is. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture. MR. DOWNEY: Yes. I didn't quite hear the member- he wasn't speaking . MR.

CHERNIACK: Sorry . You're too far away, that's why . A MEMBER: It's a popular committee . You 've got to sit at the back of the class. MR. DOWNEY: The Rural Water Services grants make up $300,000 of that and the Community Well Project grants make up $75,000 of that. MR. CHERNIACK: Did I hear $15,000 and $75,000.00? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the Rural Water Services grants make up $300,000 and the Community Wells make up $75,000.00. MR. CHERN lACK: Could the Minister also give us a breakdown of last year's expenditures of some $2 million-plus? MR.

DOWNEY: The gran ts for sewer last year which are now in place to be expended this year and any future expenditures in capital will be in next year's Estimates- were $2 million last year. Rural Water Services grants were $290,000 and community wells were $75,000.00. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry, but I'm confused about what the $2 million makes up. I gather there is approximately the same amount spent last year as is planned to spend this current year , according to what the Minister said. What is the differential which is a very substantial amount? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, as I've indicated before , the moneys that are being requested here, the $375,000, the expenditure there is for moneys to be expended this year. There is a carry over from capital moneys from the past years which will pay for any projects, it will be the work done on the projects this year, future projects within this program will be debated for next year's capital expenditures in next year 's Estimates . There is enough money in place this year to cover the proposed projects. MR. CHERN lACK: Mr.

Chairman , when we are dealing with the left-hand column, representing the last fiscal year , the implication is that $2,300,000 plus was spent last year . Is that not correct? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , when you look at the left-hand col umn where it says the $2,365,000, that money was allocated last year for the projects and it will be part of the expenditure to pay for the projects that are completed this year . MR. CHERN lACK: Well then , Mr.

Chairman , it would appear that the government, the department and this Minister, is showing an authority on the left-hand column which is not matched with a similar authority on the right-hand column and that the refore there is a disto~tion between w:hat is reported for last year as capital moneys and the other. Now, as I unde rstand 1t, that amount m excess of $2 million is

Schedule B money , is that correct? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the $2 million on the left-hand column , the $2 million is grants to the municipalities which is no longer required . It will be ~xpended because of t~e carry-over from past years Estimates and authority and $290,000 of that IS m Rural Water Services, RWS g~ants , and $75,000 of that is in community wells services . As I've stated before, the reason for deletmg the. $2 million this year is because of the moneys in place from last year 's Est1mates and any ongomg moneys will be requested in next year's budgets for next year 's projects. MR.

CHERN lACK: Well , Mr. Chai rman , then do I understand that there is $2 mill ion shown on the left-hand page that have not been expended yet? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, that money has been allocated to special projects this year that are in 1162

Monday, April 24, 1978 progress now. MR. CHERNIACK: I understood them to mean grants to municipalities. I think that 's what the Minister said . Do we now have the name of the municipality and the amount that that municipality is getting to total up to $2 million? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, it is not all committed . The information that I have is that it is pretty well all allocated on ongoing projects . MR. CHERN lACK: So that it is known to the department how much is allocated to which project to total $2 million and the Minister is showing that as if it were committed and expended last year

whereas it has not yet been expended , is that correct? MR. DOWNEY: That's correct. That's correct , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, I wonder why the Min ister did not show the amount not yet expended on the right-hand column? MR. DOWNEY: That's right, Mr. Chairman , the budgeting system for capital will be allocated the year that the money is going to be expended . MR. CHERN lACK: But , Mr. Chairman , there is a car ry-over of

Schedule B money and the Minister of Highways is here and will be accounting to us for that fairly soon , but in the meantime, it would appear that the Minister has shown as expended in last year moneys that were not expended in last year but will be expended in this year. Is that correct? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, as I indicated , the moneys that are to be expended were committed to these projects in last year 's estimates , the expenditure will take place this year, and any new projects will be in next year's estimates for next year 's expenditures. MR. CHERN lACK: Well , Mr.

Chairman, then the Minister is not asking for any money this year for this kind of program, I be}ieve that's correct from what he says, because he is this year spending money wh ich is authorized in previous years . Is that correct? MR. DOWNEY: That is correct, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHERNIACK: And he has shown on his left hand column the expenditure allocated to last year , which therefore forms part of the deficit which the government is claiming is from last year . Is that correct? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , that was last year's in voted authority . MR.

CHERN lACK: So because it was voted last year and not spent but will be spent this year , your government , Mr. Minister , is still allocating that as a deficit for last year to make up that fabulous shrinking amount which now stands at something like $80 million . Is that correct , Mr. Minister? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I would say it is a very very small part of it. MR. CHERNIACK: And so then , Mr. Chairman, the Minister admits that this is a very small part very very small part, he says- of that deficit.

But nevertheless, this item is showing as part of that deficit we have heard all that talk about and is money not yet expended. I just want to make sure that I'm right because I am going to be quoting the Minister . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , as I have stated , it is part of the voted authority for projects this year , part of it is to be expended and any ongoing programs will have to be voted in next year's estimates . MR. CHERNIACK : So it is true then that the Minister would have had a choice since it is

Schedule B money . He could have shown the moneys actually expended last year , whatever it was -let 's say it was a million dollars- and he then could have shown in his right hand column as part of his deficit rather than last year's deficit , the money which was authorizebut not expended last year . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , as I have indicated , it is shown here as last year 's voted authority , and we have requested no new capital for ongoing projects and as I have said many times, that that will be requested in next year 's estimates for the new projects . MR. CHERNIACK: But, Mr.

Chairman , meanwhile , we learned in the resolution· immediately preceding this, that there is some $5 million in

Schedule A money yet to be expended, and that will be sufficient for this coming year . That's not shown as an expenditure, but this money which was authorized as

Schedule B money , is already being shown as an expenditure even though it is not spent, and is therefore part of the deficit. I am asking the Minister , am I correct in making that 1163

Monday, April 24, 1978 statement? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, as I have indicated, it has not all been expended, it is voted authority from last year's to finish the projects this year because of the ongoing nature of the programs. MR. CHERN lACK: Will the Minister certify that this is money authorized from last year or could it be moneys authorized from say, the year preceding last year? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , some of it could be. MR. CHERNIACK: Yes, because, Mr. Chairman, it is

Schedule B money , and

Schedule B money is not allocated at the time of the vote, it's allocated at the time of the commitment. Is that not correct? MR. DOWNEY: That is correct. MR. CHERNIACK: Well then, I am just summarizing this , Mr. Chairman , to say that part of this deficit which has received so much publicity by the current government , is money which has not been expended yet and will be expended in the year of this government. That is the conclusion which I would like the Minister to confirm or correct if it's not correct. MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , I am sure that the Minister of Finance could answer those kinds of questions for him when it comes to his estimates . MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman , this becomes even more interesting . The Minister of Agriculture dealing with his estimates is now deferring to the Minister of Finance . Does the Minister of Agriculture therefore not know the answer to the question I have been posing? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , would he propose a question again , as he wants a new answer. MR. CHERNIACK: Well , I am qaying that this is the Minister of Agriculture 's estimates .

It shows a $2 million expenditure , which I now understand is not entirely expended but rather committed . The Minister has confirmed that it forms part of the deficit that has received all this publicity, and if that is the case, that it is not yet expended , then I am saying to the Minister that his government and he himself within his department is showing a deficit which could well be shown as being part of this current year's operation since the expenditure is not being made until this current year. MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , as I have indicated in the procedure that we have followed, that the $2 million has been voted and we are showing the voted moneys from last year in the left hand estimates and the $2 million has been voted to carry on with projects that are ongoing this coming year . The moneys that are in place on completion of projects will be expended out of that authority. MR. CHERNIACK: And there will be no other commitment or expendi ture in this current year . MR. DOWNEY: That is right , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHERN lACK: Is there money available for commitment for the expenditure in the following year? MR.

DOWNEY : Mr. Chairman , there is a portion of it, yes. MR. CHERNIACK: Of this $2 million? MR. DOWNEY: Add itional. MR. CHERNIACK: Where is the additional coming from ? -(Interjection)- No, I am sorry , Mr. Chairman , that's why I am trying to understand it, because we were talking about

Schedule A money, which is allocated from the very beginning of the authority , and

Schedule B is this $2 million . Now is there more money in

Schedule B? MR. CHAIRMAN: Maybe while the Minister is getting his answer to the last question , I can ask the members at this Committee if there are any members present interested in participating in the public bills at 4:30- Bill 5 and Bill 6. I am told that if there are people prepared to participate, then we will adjourn Committee at 4:30 and go back into the House , if not , we can carry right through till 5:30 on the Minister 's estimates . MR. CHERNIACK : Mr. Chairman , there are other items on Private Members . .. There are also some resolutions , aren't there? MR. CHAIRMAN : To the Member for St.

Johns , I'm told that there are no Resolutions and the ones that have been transferred for debate are not eligible until Wednesday so there are only the two items . 1164

Monday, April 24, 1978 They are Bill No. 5, the Act to Amend the Liquor Control Act and Bill No. 6, the Freedom of Information Act. What is the wish of the members present? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I think it's obvious that some of us want to be in the House . MR. CHAIRMAN: All rigut , then we will rise at 4:30. All right Warner? MR. JORGENSON: No, that's what I'm trying to find out.

If anybody wanted or had planned to speak on any of those then we will adjourn the Committees and go into the House and discuss Private Members' Bills but if there 's nobody going to be speaking to Private Members' Bills, there's hardly any point because then you'll just adjourn and come back again. A MEMBER: Well check on those that adjourned debate . Are they going to be speaking? MR. JORGENSON: Yes, I have. They don't want to speak. They just asked me to find out if there's anybody else that wanted to . A MEMBER: Okay. We'll stay in Committee then. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lac du Bonnet.

Wait a minute , Warner . MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman , the point that we were making is that if the debate was to be carried on on those two items , then some of us would want to be there to hear the debate but we are not intending to speak on it today. MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, sorry for not making myself clear on that. All right, we will carry on. Committee will continue until 5:30. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman , I wonder if on a point of order , I can't. .. I recognize of course the point that the Honourable Member for St. Johns wishes to pursue.

I think the advice given by the Minister is probably appropriate, and we recognize that there has been some difficulty in reconciling and perhaps some confusion in the changing of the Estimates to combine current and capital and that, in some instances, the advice from Finance people is probably appropriate in clarifying these matters. I point out to the Honourable Member for St.

Johns that hopefully in a short while he'll have to reverse his arguments when he deals with Highways Estimates because, of course, in Highways he's worried about something that we're not showing and not listing as being moneys that in fact weren't spent but indeed were spent. So, as a courtesy to the Member for St. Johns, I just want to indicate to him that at this point he will have to reverse his argument that he's now pursuing with the Minister of Agriculture. But, seriously, Mr.

Chaiman , the suggestion made by the Minister of Agriculture that somebody from the Department of Finance ought perhaps to be asked to be present to help clarify the method of showing the moneys and the allocation of dollars this year to last year and the combination of capital and current. MR. CHAIRMAN: On the point of order? MR. CHERNIACK: Well , have you ruled on his point of order? Do you understand his point of order? Because if you do . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, I think I do. MR. CHERN lACK: . .. well, you 're ahead of me and the Minister of Agriculture agrees that you're ahead of me.

I don't know where you stand in relation to him but . MR. CHAIRMAN: We're both seated. MR. CHERNIACK: Well, that's probably as high as you stand on this order. MR. CHAIRMAN: But I think his point of order was more of a point of information. MR. CHERN lACK: Yes, I don 't think it was a point of order either, Mr. Chairman. The Minister of Highways suggests that I will have to reverse my questioning . That's not true. I'm getting at that because it would appear, Mr.

Chairman , and I want clarification from the Minister of Agriculture, that in his case he is showing moneys which apparently were authorized but not spent

whereas it appears from statements already made by the Minister of Highways and the First Minister, that they are talking about moneys that have not been spent and not been authorized and they're already taking it into their figures so that the reversal that's going to take place when we deal with Highways is an explanation of what appeared to me to be two contradictory methods of procedure, one by the Minister of Agriculture , one by the Minister of Highways . Now if the Minister of Highways is expert on this apportionment of capital moneys from

Schedule B, that's fine . And if the Minister of Agriculture needs help from somebody in the Finance Department, the building is here and there are people here 1165

Monday, April 24, 1978 .from Management or from anywhere who would have been responsible for that $2 million shown on the last year's account. It shouldn't be too difficult, surely, to find out what it is the Minister is showing us. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the $2 million in

Schedule B that is carried over in grants to municipalities are in place , as I've stated before, they are in place to be expended on some of the projects that will be completed this year and there will also be a carry-over of part of that into next year 's Estimates. MR. CHERN lACK: Mr. Chairman, I'm back to my original problem . I understood the Minister to say that all of it has been allocated and there are specific municipalities and specific moneys that are known for this whole amount and that that's why they're shown for last year.

Now the Minister says that not only is there money available for this year but also will be available for the following year . Does that mean that it is now known which municipalities will receive which moneys in the fiscal year ending 1980? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the amount of money carried over from last year's Schedu le B, as I've stated , was $2 million voted which will be expended, the greater portion of it, I would assume , this year and the balance of it in the next year and some carried over from the previous year .

We also have some moneys carried over to some other projects and there is also an additional5.4 carried over .. . MR. CHERNIACK: Yes, but for what? MR. DOWNEY: . .. including the $2 million. MR. CHERNIACK: 5.4 what? MR. DOWNEY: Million dollars carried over from the last two to three years in projects that weren't completed . MR. CHERNIACK:

Schedule B money? MR. DOWNEY:

Schedule B money , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHERNIACK: Well does that then mean, Mr. Chairman, that all of it is committed, the 5.6 million is committed dollars? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture . MR.

DOWNEY: The total carry forward of the accumulated moneys, inclu ding the $2 million that's in the left-hand column , which makes up part of the acquisition and construction of physical assets of last year 's, that $2 million is included in and we have a 5.448 carry-over from the previous years that were not expended, that are voted to be expended in this year's projects and to carry-over to part of next year ects . Additional projects to be capitalized will be voted in next year's Estimates for ongoing programs . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Is all of that

Schedule B money? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, that is all

Schedule B money. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, did this current government allocate any money at all out of

Schedule B, or is it all from the previous government's decisions? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , that is carry-over. MR. CHERNIACK: That means this government has not committed any of that 5.4 or 6 million . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , we've committed it, but it hasn't been voted . MR. CHERNIACK: This government , this current government , has done that? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, it has all been voted and the greater portion of it, quite a lot of it, has been committed on ongoing projects. It's an accumulation of projects that have been in process for the past two years . MR. CHERNIACK: I wanted to know if this current government , the Conservative government , of 1166

Monday, April 24, 1978 wh ich t his Min ister is Minister of Agriculture, and has been for its length of time, did his department commit any of that money that he is speaking about as already committed? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, some of that money has been committed by our government. MR. CHERNIACK: Now , when the Minister uses the term, "voted," he can't really mean that , because

Schedule B money is not allocated money until it has been committed, and therefore I ask again , was $2 million committed , or was it 5.6, including the 2 million, committed? MR. DOWNEY: Of the 5.4, some of it was committed by this government and some of it was committed by the previous government. MR. CHERNIACK: Now, Mr. Chairman , we have $5.4 million of

Schedule B money, of which all, I now understand, is authorized and committed, and yet only 2 million of the 5.6 million is being shown as expended in the last year . But the Minister has said that only part ofthat 2 million was expended in the last year . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the 2 million is not shown as committed ; it's shown as voted in last year 's. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman , that's the very point I'm making .

All of the general purpose money was voted ; all cap ital moneys that are authorized are voted , but general purpose money is not allocated until it has been committed , and I guess through the Management Committee , so that all of this 5.6 million apparently is committed money . And if all of it is committed money, then I'm asking whether 2 million was committed in the last fiscal year and 3.6 million has already been committed by the present government for this fiscal year , which only started 20 days ago , Mr. Chairman. That's why I don 't understand . MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman , I'm wondering whether it wouldn 't be wise to adjourn the afternoon debate and come back at 8:00 o'clock when the Minister would be more prepared to answer the questions . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the allocation of funds out of the moneys voted , the ones that were in lace and had been approved were re-approved by the new administration through the process of review . MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, I have one more question . I think only one , and then I think maybe the Member for Lac du Bonnet's suggestion would be valid .

I hope that we are talking about two different 5-mill ion-plus figures , because under the previous resolution we were talking about 5 million and some available under

Schedule A of self-sustaining moneys , and now we're talking about a very similar figure which I understand to be

Schedule B. If I'm correct and they are two separate 5-plus mill ion dollar figures , at least I understand that much. Mr. Chairman , I don 't want to press this issue. Obviously it's not clear yet just what is allocated, what is committed and what is expended as between the two fisca l years , and I do think it's important to know , because we have been hearing all sorts of accusations about deficits and I want to trace just where they are.

I want to know what is the program for this coming year, and it's not clear because capital was lumped in with current for last year , but apparently it's not lumped in with current in the present Estimates we're dealing with -I think that's clea r. The Minister said there 's some $5 million that will be spent this year and next year and that it's not in the current Estimates .

It seems to me - let me just enlarge on that- it seems to me it would only be logical that if money is going to be spent out of capital author ity that's accumulated from previous years, obviously, it should be shown as a footnote or someth ing to show just where it's going to be spent in the current year on the right-hand column , because otherwise we're getting a terrible distortion . Here we are being shown capital moneys expended last year , and opposite it we're being shown only current moneys to be raised on the right-hand column .

I think that since the Minister 's already told us that there will be moneys spent in this fiscal year out of previously authorized capital moneys, that there is a great deal of confusion in the Estimates . The Minister of Highways has already indicated that apparently in his department this capital authority from previous years is being treated differently than the capital authority that is being shown in the Department of Agricu lture. Therefore , Mr.

Cha irman , I think it's unfair of me- maybe it has been for a few minutes already- to be pressing this Minister to explain the bookkeeping or money management program that may have been done overall by Management Committee , but I don 't feel like letting go of this question just because this Minister has not been apprised of the information . I'm saying it out of sympathy because when he wanted to call on the Minister of Finance, I could well understand his problem of being unable to reconcile the two .

So I am prepared to drop it on the understanding that we're going to get an answer somehow, and I hope soon enough so that we can intelligently deal with the Highways Department , which is next , and which has its own kind of bookkeeping, apparently , separate from that of the Department of Agriculture. 1167

Monday, April 24, 1978 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Seven Oaks. He's been waiting very patiently to . MR. SAUL A. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, on the same topic . Did I understand the Minister correctly to say that there's $5.4 million of unallocated but authorized, authorized but unallocated funds, either from 1977-78 or 1976-77, going back over a number of years . That it adds up to 5.4, but in fact hadn't been entirely allocated . Am I right in that? And now is partially allocated . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the 5.4 which you are indicating has been in the process of being allocated and is now almost allocated . MR.

MILLER: So what I'm wondering is this : of the 5.4, the left-hand column , which is March 31 , 1978, includes moneys which were voted in general purposes capital , whether last year or the year before, or whatever , to the extent of $2 million? There is still 3.4 million which doesn't appear anywhere . All right , now , I'm asking this question. If it was authorized , and if you choose to show some of the authorization and tag it on to the year 1978, the left-hand column , then why don't you put the entire authorized capital in the left-hand column? In other words, you are just taking , Mr.

Chairman , partial authorization and putting it in the left-hand column as a charge against 1978, but there's still $3.4 million which you choose not to show anywhere , even though it was authorized in previous years . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , in the left-hand column we have shown only the $2,365,000 that was voted in last year 's. MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman , is the Minister now saying that what is shown in the left-hand column - the $2,365,000 in the left-hand column -the $2,365,000 in the left-hand column is supposed to compare with what line in the 1977-78 Estimates?

On Page 7 of the Estimates it shows $2,365,000 as

Schedule B capital voted in the Loan Act of 1977. The entire amount. Mr. Chairman , as I see it here , what is shown, as I say, on Page 7 of the Reconciliation Statement, is the amount of $2,365,000, which , since it is shown here , I assume that is the amount that was allocated during the year 1977, that is the fiscal year 1977 ending March 31st, 1978. That is the amount allocated and that's why it is shown in the left hand column. Am I right? MR. DOWNEY: Would you reindicate , you're on Page 7, the . .. MR. MILLER: I'm saying that on Page 7, the Reconc ili ation Statement shows the same figure of $2,365,000 as

Schedule B Capital voted in The Loan Act 1977. In other words, this is the amount that was actually allocated out of general purposes capital for the year 1977-78. Is that right? Not just voted , just allocated , actually allocated . MR. DOWNEY: Yes, it was allocated . MR. MILLER: So that's why you show it in the left hand column. MR. DOWNEY: That is right, Mr. Chairman . MR.

MILLER: And yet earl ier on , you indicated that of the moneys of the 3.4 million that might still be remaining , you indicated that in fact almost all of it, or a great deal of it has in a sense been allocated , that is, earmarked , it may not be being spent but it's earmarked . If it is allocated and earmarked , then wouldn 't it only be proper to indicate in the right hand column , the moneys which you will be drawing from

Schedule B because these are for allocated proj ects . Instead of which, what you show here is a minimum figure of $375,000 which of course is not th e amount you are going to be spending at all. It's probably more like $2,375,000 on the right hand column , that 's for this coming fiscal year. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , that is moneys that have already been voted and it would mean revoting it for this coming year, and it's already been ... MR. MILLER: Everything has been voted , Mr.

Chairman , including what shows on the left hand column , it's all been voted , and if you choose to show it in the left hand column even though it was voted in the previous year , then to be consistent you should carry the same format over into the right hand column . To simply say we voted it last year and therefore we are not going to show it again , then in that case it shouldn 't appear on the left hand side either , because what you're doing here is you're mixing up two formats- cash flow and author ization .

On the left hand side you have cash flow and on the right hand side you 're not showing cash flow , except the minimal administrative amount. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Johns . MR. CHERN lACK: The problem is the Member for Seven Oaks is talking about cash flow for the $2 million , but I think the Minis ter already told us that of the $2 million it hasn't all been spent. It has been committed but not spent and it's going to be spent in this current year . So now we have some $2 1168

Monday, April 24, 1978 m~llion which is shown as of last year ~ommitted b~t not all of it ~pent, some of it carrying forward into th1s year and apparently some carrymg forward 1n the followmg year then we're learning another $5.4 million, I think . . . ' A MEMBER: No, same money . MR. CHERNIACK: All right. So out of $5.4 million , $2 million was committed last year but not all spent, some of it to be spent this year .

There must be another $3 million or$3.4 million that is already committed, otherwise it wouldn 't be taken out of General Purposes , and the Minister has indicated most of it is committed and if it was committed in this current year then it would appear as if it was committed within the last three weeks , which I find difficult to believe, and I suspect therefore that it was committed by the current government in the last fiscal year and not shown as such in the left hand column . MR. DOWNEY: It was committed in the last year and reaffirmed in this year's . . . MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Chairman , I'm worried that the Honourable Minister doesn't quite understand . . . MR. DOWNEY: .. . through management, it's been reaffirmed through management to proceed. MR. CHERNIACK: Oh, so it means that management committee has authorized in the last three weeks . MR. DOWNEY: I didn't say that. MR. CHERNIACK: Well then I don't understand, Mr. Chairman, why it was not shown in the previous year's expenditures . If it were committed in the last fiscal year why isn't it shown as last fiscal year? MR. DOWNEY: That's right, Mr. Chairman, the $2 million shows the voted moneys and not the expenditures. MR.

CHERN lACK: Mr. Chairman, I really want to help the Minister, I really do , to tell him that the moneys he's talking about were voted last year or the previous year , or the previous year- all the money he is talking about was voted except for $375,000, which is yet to be voted on -so that he must understand all

Schedule A and

Schedule 88 money f previous years has been voted. But General Purpose money is not allocated until the amount is committed . That's the point I am trying to make, so it's not voting that counts , it's the commitment that counts .

If it's not committed, then it is still General Purposes , that it is not assigned to this department, and therefore the Minister of Highways with his leader, are able to take all that money or any amount they want to take in, into the Highways Department as being moneys ... we don 't know yet , he has yet to explain to us where he got some $27 or $29 million that appears nowhere except so far in his head .

So I am trying to figure out just how it's going to be shown and I want to assure the Honourable Minister that all the money was voted, but the $5.4 million, its distribution as between various years and the extent to which it is committed is still unclear . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the $2 million in B that we're talking about was committed for grants to mun icipalities . The $3.5 was committed by the last administration and confirmed by th is one and will be expended in this year's and next year 's proposed expenditures . MR.

CHERNIACK: Well then, could the Minister please explain the difference between the $2 million that was committed and shown from last year and the $3 million which apparently was committed last year as well, neither of which are fully expended . That's my problem . He said the $2 million was not fully expended , therefore it was not expended and committed . How does it differ from the $3.4 million? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , as I have indicated , the $2 million in grants in

Schedule 88 has been carried forward and is committed on last year's and will be expended on this year 's programs . The 3.5 is also committed and will be expended on the projects that are in place and that are ongoing, all dealing with Water Services. MR. CHERNIACK: Now I've got two questions . One is, can the Minister explain the difference in the nature of the projects between the $2 million for last year and the $3.5 million that's left over? What is the difference? The Minister said in both cases they are committed and will be spent over the next year or two. How do they differ?

I want the Minister to reflect on what he said , Mr. Chairman . He says there is no difference between the 2 and 3.5, so the question is why didn't they show five and a half million in the left hand column? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the $2 million was all that was voted last year, not the $3.5 million . 1169

Monday, April 24, 1978 MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, 1 have to assure the Minister that if th~t $~ . 5 million is c~rnmitted it had to have been voted at some time in the past , it had to have been voted . I don t thmk he can say 1t s not been voted yet, it had to have been voted . MR. DOWNEY: That's right , Mr. Chairman , it was voted . MR. MILLER: It had to be General Purposes capital originally . MR. DO NEY: That's right. MR. CHERN lACK: Well now , are there distinctions being made between what was voted last year and what was voted in preceding years? And let me explain , Mr.

Chairman , I'm coming to the conclusion that there was an arbitrary decision made to show $2 million in this column . MR. DOWNEY : Mr. Chairman , the decision was made to show what was voted. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Cha irman , I have to say that that 3.5 million described by the member has been voted . Is he saying it was not voted, and if not voted , then when will it be voted if he has already committed it.

He can't have committed money that hasn't been voted, and I'd caution him to be careful about that word voted , because I don 't believe that they committed money that was not voted and I don 't want him to get lost in nomenclature. And I have another question , Mr. Chairman . My other question is, I thought that there was abou t the similar amount of 5.5 mill ion for Water Services in

Schedule A money which was referred to under the prev ious resolu tion . Now I'm learning that this too is Water Services money , so is there $11 mill ion available for Water Services? MR. BOYCE: I have a question , Mr. Chairman , whenever it comes in order. MR. CHAIRMAN: All right , I shal l write your name down. The Min ister of Agriculture . MR. DOWNEY: The $3.4 million of the moneys in place to carry on with the projects , $3.4 million was voted prior t~ the Loan Act of 1977 with the authority to be committed for projects ; $2 million that we were d1scussmg was voted m

Schedule Band was specially for grants for Municipal Sewer and Water. MR. CHERNIACK: The 3.5 million voted prior to last year , was that

Schedule A or B? MR. DOWNEY: That is

Schedule B, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHERN lACK: And that's over and above the

Schedule A money that was referred to as some $5.5 million that was available for Water Services? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, it is, Mr. Chairman , over and above ... MR. CHERN lACK: Well , Mr. Chairman , what I don 't understand is how that $3.5 million could have been voted under

Schedule B unless it was allocated for Water Services because

Schedule B money , as I understand it, and if I were only corrected I wouldn 't be pressing this , but my impression is the

Schedule B money is called "general purposes " and is not comm itted until it's allocated . I'm getting , somebody who knows is shaking his head at me and I think he- I would rely on his ... MR. CHAIRMAN: May I acknowledge the Member for Seven Oaks . MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman , to clarify it, there 's some portion of

Schedule B which was allocated . lt was specifically voted for a particular pro ject or projects or services even though it was under

Schedule B. That is in addition to the general purposes which cou ld be moved any which way depending on where it was required . So there is a part of

Schedule B which is tied and could not be moved except by a vote of the Legislature . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Johns . MR. CHERNIACK: Now , as I understand it, there was $3.5 million carried forward for Water Services in

Schedule B from previous to 1977, there 's $2 million voted

Schedule Blast year , making a total of $5.5 million . I understand that all of that practical ly has been committed in the last year . Therefore I still don 't understand why only $2 million of the $5.5 mill ion was shown as being last year 's money . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture . 1170

Monday, April 24, 1978 MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , all the moneys that are shown here is the total and it's a budgeting procedure when we're changing to the budgeting for the year of the project and this is a changing of systems. MR. CHERNIACK: Well then, I would like to ask the Min ister- he may not have this answer, but I'd like to ask the Minister whether in calculating the deficit to which we've already referred, how much of that capital money , that $5.5 million , is shown as being part of the deficit? MR. DOWNEY : Mr.

Chairman , that is calculated by the Department of Finance and will be handled by his departmen t. MR. CHERN lACK: And the Departmen t of Agriculture does not know the kinds of moneys that are being allocated to the Department of Agric ulture as having been spent in the last year. That's the conclusion I come to . MR. DOWNEY : Mr. Chairman , Finance have not given us that figure . MR. CHERN lACK: So, Mr.

Chairman , it means that when we hear about this great big ballooned but shrin king deficit that the individual departments- in this case Agriculture- is not aware of what port ion of that deficit is shown as being forming part of that deficit . You know I'm just summarizing what I believe is the correct conclusion from what the Minister has said. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, we don 't have that .. . MR. CHERNIACK: Then I go further .

There's some part of this money, be it $2 million or $5.5 million , that may be part of that deficit that we've heard so much about and, to the extent that there is that , I understand that most of that $5.5 million has not been spent yet- committed but not spent. I think that

part is clear , that most of the $5.5 million in

Schedule 8 allocated money has not been spent. Therefore , Mr. Chairman, ! would ask . . . MR. DOWNEY: It has been committed but not totally expended yet. MR. CHERNIACK: Right. I would ask the Minister who has the authority to ascertain for us how much money from that $5.5 million has been included in the deficit figure which, I think , is now up to $181 million? And I know he hasn't got the answer , obviously , now , but I ask him if he will obtain that answer. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , the department will attempt to get that figure . MR. CHERN lACK: Well , Mr. Chairman , I appreciate the Minister 's efforts .

I wish he would use his own name rather than the department and say that he would attempt to ascertain that because not only is he the Minister of this department, he's a member of Management Committee and therefore I wou ld think that it is information that is either with in his possession or which he's entitled to get. And I'm therefore asking him quite formally , "Will he give us an answer to that question? How much of the $5.5 million of committed but unexpended money has been shown in the deficit figure that is being bandied about by various members of his government? MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , I can assure him that I will discuss it with the Minister of Finance and attempt to get the information. MR. CHERNIACK: I think we'll let that go now. I hope it will come before his salary is being discussed . MR. CHAIRMAN : The Member for Seven Oaks. MR. MILLER: Mr.

Chairman , I don't want to address myself to what has been said already but I am concerned about the format which has been presented to us and which , of course, has been presented to the public , because simply look ing at the two columns one is led to believe that somehow there 's been a substantial decrease in the size of the agricultural Budget and the spending that will occur this year, but , in fact , that isn't the case we now know- that the moneys have been voted in the past will be spent. They 're not being cancelled out. They 're not being reduced in any way. They will be spent.

And so for this year and next year there will be the phenomena of apparent decrease in expenditures where , in fact , expend itures may be far greater . And so it seems to me that the format that's been presented to us here and perhaps throughout in other departments, although I suspect they may be somewhat differen t in other departments , is misleading, not only to members in the opposition but to the public generally , and certainly to the media who accept these figures as bona fide when they look at them.

That they look on one side, and they look on the left-hand side and they look to the right-hand side and they say, "Well , there 's been a cut," and nobody has corrected them. I think it's now fair to say that , in the light of what we've heard and even though the Minister may have furthe r information which I hope he'll be able to get , what we've heard already indicates very 1171

Monday, April 24, 1978 clearly that the figures on the left-hand side and the figures on the right-hand side are not to be used as a measurement of what the government is going to be doing this year in the way of expenditures, that , in fact, the expenditures that are going to take place don 't relate at all to the right-hand column but, in fact, the present government is taking advantage of voting that took place in other years to make the right-hand column, that is, expenditures for this year, look remarkably low when, in fact, they're going to be considerably higher than what these Estimates indicate.

And so all I'm putting on the record , Mr. Speaker, is my regret that whoever did it chose to present a format without footnotes which appeared to show a substantial diminution in expenditures when , in fact, that diminution will not occur and they are simply taking advantage of authorities voted but not expended in previous years to blow up or to try to show the higher expenditure in the years that the NDP was in office . MR.

DOWNEY: Yes, the explanation that I would say in this regard is the changing of the budgeting system and , because of the progress of our government and next year it will be a that, as the money is required for next year 's projects will certainly be included in capital expenditures. Mr. Chairman , as I said, the change in the budgeting procedure has created this difference here. These are our estimates for expenditures this year , which are shown in the right-had right-hand column . The left hand column is the money for last year . MR. MILLER: Mr.

Chairman, the Minister uses the word that in the right-hand column you'll see the expenditures for this year . That's not so. The right-hand column is a vote, but not the expenditures . The expenditures are going to be, perhaps , $3 million higher or $5 million higher if you can spend it that fast. You know, it depends how fast you spend it. But in fact the expenditures are at least $3 million more. So that the figure of $29.8 million should read more like $32.8 or $33 million if you are going to use the term "expenditures ". MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , yes, I will correct that.

That is right; instead of saying "expenditures " I should have said the right-hand column is a voted amount for this year and the left-hand column was voted for last year. MR. MILLER: And the reason you were able to show this low an amount is because the authority was voted in previous years . And so your vote this year shows low because of the authority voted in previous years. Is that right, Mr. Minister? MR. DOWNEY: That is partially correct, Mr. Chairman . MR. MILLER: What

part is not correct? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Johns . MR. CHERN lACK: Mr. Chairman, but the record now shows that the Member for Seven Oaks made a statement and the Minister said that's partially correct but he has not responded to the extent to which it is not correct. So I wouldn't push that, because I have another question . Well, I have a suggestion to make to the Minister.

Wouldn 't he be much happier if he were allowed to go back and redo the right-hand column to show the anticipated expenditure is this current fiscal year to correctiV show those moneys which will spent or committed this year , be it from previous capital authority or from the current vote that he is asking for . Wouldn 't that be a much clearer picture for him to go back and redo that right-hand column to make it look more like the left-hand column? Would he like that opportunity? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , when I suggest that- in the partial part of it- we still have the $375,000 in the right-hand column ... MR.

CHERNIACK : All the more reason . Now I really think we are all smiling although we ought to be criticizing the Minister for bringing that in. The fact then is that the statement made by Mr. Miller is correct, that there is some other type of expenditure of $300,000 plus some $65,000 or $75,000 that is a repeat from last year . But his statement is correct and I therefore want to invite the Minister agatn to rework that right-hand column to show the correct expenditure. Not for an autho rity; we don't want to vote it twice .

I think really either the Minister and his government should have cancelled all previous authority unused and start from a clear zero budgeting thing , which they 've talked about- zero based - and said we are going to spend for this coming year the following moneys. Either they should have done that or they should have footnoted all their Estimates down the line to add to it the amount of money already voted which they are going to use this year . Either of the two would have been a much more honest presentat ion .

And therefore I am saying to the Ministe r - since I'm sure he doesn't have the authority to lapse all previous capital moneys which I think they should have done to be honest , to present a new picture , zero-based budgeting and all of that , since he himself has no authority to do that, let him do what he does have the authority to do and bring to us a statement of recapitulation of the right-hand column with an honest presentation of the intentions of his department for expenditures we could then easily figure out how much of that is the use from previous unused capital authority , and what he is asking for currently .

Then we could understand it, 1172 -...

Monday, April 24, 1978 and we would have saved about an hour's debate already this last hour, which would not have been necessary had we had a completely honest and full presentation. Does the Minister want to take advantage of that suggestion? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, we are here to discuss the amounts that are voted and the moneys that I've indicated earlier have been voted in previous years. We are here to vote the moneys for this year, not the expenditures, and that is the reason for the figures. MR. CHERN lACK: The Minister is absolutely right.

It is very clear that he is asking for an authority to spend that money on the right-hand column, but he has now informed us- I was going to say admitted, but let's say he has informed us- his intentions are to spend more money than the money he is indicating as money for which he wants authority . We know at least $3.5 million more money will be spent, maybe $5 million- we don 't know- that his department has already planned to expend in this coming year . So I'm saying to him, I understand, all he needs authority for is $29,829,000.00.

The fact is, that when in the left-hand column they show $36,500,000, that that wasn't authority needed in current last year, it was authority that was received in capital and in current, so I am now using the word quite strictly in its correct sense. I would like an honest presentation of the commitments which this government wishes to make for expenditures in this year, and since we know that it includes unused capital authority, we are asking him to give us the full information so we know how he's going to do it. Now, Mr. Chairman, one more point. He says that's all the authority he needs.

The fact is, he needs authority for his salary , and that means there is author ity needed for his salary plus everybody else's salary in his department , reduced as it may be, plus the money for program, plus the money for which there is also an authority. And if he did zero-based budgeting, then if he had honestly done zero based budgeting, he would have started from zero, and the fact is we are learning he did not start from zero, he started with unused, authorized capital authority .

And therefore, let him at least come to us - I'm trying to avoid pejorative words- come to us with a fu II picture rather than a partial one, and it should not be difficult unless they've confused the books so much that they can't get an easy way out of it. But I don't believe that, there is no question in my mind of the competence of the people that are still working for the government , and I believe that they will be able to calculate a full presentation on the assumption that the government did what it said it would do, and that is start with zero-based budgeting.

And then we would know what the Department of Agriculture is planning to do with the money it has authority and wants authority to spend. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Winnipeg Centre has been patiently waiting for his turn. MR. J.R. (Bud} BOYCE: Mr. Chairman , as the Minister says, they have changed their procedures, and I'm rather wondering just how exactly it will balance out in the final analysis.

No doubt , some of these questions will have to wait until Public Accounts- a year from now- but nevertheless, when the Minister says that some of the money has been allocated this year and some of the money will be allocated next year, I really don 't understand. The year-end closed as of the end of the month. I wonder if the Minister could advise us how much money he had to ask by way of special warrant, if any, at the end of the fiscal year? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , we didn't have any special warrant. MR. BOYCE: So there was no special warrant.

Can the Minister give us a breakdown of just how much of this $2 million has been allocated, by project , for this year and for next year? I would refresh people's memories, Mr. Chairman, on one particular appropriation here a few year's ago, we got bogged down on $17,500 for a printing press for Public Works until they brought in the specifications and everything else for us. You know , I have been following with great interest the questions of the Members for St. Johns and Seven Oaks. Just exactly how much of the general purpose existing authority has been allocated to last year?

So perhaps I could ask the Minister a specific question . How much exist ing authority did he have at the end of the last fiscal year, and how much of the general purposes existing authority was allocated to Agriculture? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, we could attempt to get that information for the member . I'd have to check with the department to get the answer to his question. MR. BOYCE: Through you, Mr. Chairman, to the Minister , would this not apply to other items that we have already p

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-2-27a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 2nd hansardpdf 27a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	2fc734383b88d0c5ad220572e5dd36e6bf84e5cf

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