Manitoba Hansard — 21 March 1972 (Sitting 14, 29th Legislature, 4th Session)

29-4-14

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable Peter Fox Vol. XIX No. 14 8:00p.m., Tuesday, March 21st, 1972. Fourth Session, 29th Legislature. Printed by R. S. Evans- Queen's Printer for Province of Manitoba

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 8:0 0 o'clock, Tuesday, March 21, 1972 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Matthe ws. 271 MR. WALLY JOHANNSON (St. Matthews): Mr. Speaker, before this afternoon I had some reservations about getting nasty but after the performanqe of the Honourable Member for Emerso n, who is us ually not quite as intemperate as he was today, I have really no misgivings at all. I doubt though that I can quite emulate the performance of the Honourable Member for Osborne. Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to -- (Interject ion) -- Pardon? That's a compli ment . Mr.

Speaker, I would like to bide by the tradition and commend you upon your perfor mance as Speaker in the House. You have a very di fficult job and the members in this House don't make it any easier for you. They happen to be a very unruly rather uncontrollable lot, some of them act as laws unto themselves and you have my sy mpathy a great deal of the time.

Even though the House is very disorderly at times there is at least one advantage that arises out of that disorder, and that is that debate can be very witty at times, pretty exciting at times and often very entertaining, particularly when the Member for Lakeside is putting on one of his acts . In fact it's often said that the gas house on Broadway provides the best sh ow in town. I would like to welcome the new Member for Minnedosa, I'm sorry that he isn't in his chair.

I particularly want to congratulate him upon his maiden speech; it had the marks of balance, good judgment and a very responsible and constructive approach to the role of a mem ber of the oppos ition. -- (Interjection) -- We all deteriorate I guess after a while. I think judging by that first speech that a good number of the members of the oppos it ion could learn a great deal from their new member from Minnedosa. I'd like to extend congratulations to the new members of the Executive Council, particu larly to my former seatmate the Member for The Pas who is now Minister without Portfolio.

I hope that he can develop a good tough hide in the days ahead, he'll require it. Also may I extend my congratulations to the new Deputy Speaker and judging by his first speech he's going to be very impartial in chairing the House. And finally, I would like to congratulate the mover and the seconder of the Throne Speech. They, of course, were not impartial and I thought they did a very good job of throwing a few digs into the oppos ition. Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition when he spoke on the Throne Speech launched a scatte r gun attack on the government in the hopes ofl guess hitting some weak spots.

This seems to be a pattern for the Oppos ition, they fire at everything in sight hoping that they hit so mething. He continually made what I would consider irresponsible and wild charges and did n't bother to document them, and this is also a habit that the oppos ition members seem to have fallen into. He continually repeated the refrain that this was a tired and a collapsing government and after lis tening to this speech and the speech he gave last year I would su ggest that he hire a new speech writer. He obviously hasn't got a very good one. -- (Interjection) - Did he? Very good.

The same quality as the last one. I'd like to examine one major government program, the housing program in light of the charges of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposi tion says that this is a tired and a collaps ing government. He sa ys that it's a government that's retreating from its plans and its hopes , a government that has failed to manage the simplest of government programs, a government that shows no sensitivity to the problems and opportunities facing Manitobans . I'd like to look at the housing program of the government in light ·of these charges and see whether they' re borne out.

In the years of the late lamented Conservative Government, in the days of the late Conservative Government, in a period of over a decade the Conservatives built 500 to 600 units of public housi ng, This government -- (Interjection) -- A great many people. This government when it really began its housing program in 1970 built 1, 220 units.

The target that we set for 1971 was 3, 600 units and because -- and this is rather ironic -- because of the opposi tion that developed in a number of the suburbs to a number of public housing projects , because of this opposition, the government eventually built 4, 270 units -- or committed 4, 270 units . The tar get was 3, 600; MHRC, the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation has built or committed 4, 270 units for the year 1971. They're not all built yet.

The .Conservative Leader says that this is a tired and a collapsing government, a government that is capable of exceeding its target of housing starts for 1971 by over 700 units . You know it's unfortunate that the province didn't have a tired and collapsing government like this in the 19 60's.

272 March 21, 1972 (M R. JOHANNSON cont•

d) Now, Mr. Speaker, the need for the hous ing program is obvious and sev eral oppositi on members have admitted this . The Honourable Member for Ass iniboia and the Honourable Member for La Verendrye, they recognize the need for a housing program. They differ on some of the methods of implementation, and I'll go into that later. But there's little question of the fact that there is· a very serious housi ng need. The Metro Housing Stud y of 1967 for example st ated that 48 percent of the population of Winnipeg couldn't buy or rent hous ing at market prices, or market rents in the City of Winnipeg.

Almo st half of the population of Winnipeg couldn't ob tain housing at a reasonable rent in accordance with their income. And let's have a look at the hous ing that has been put up for sale. In 1971 only eight percent of the houses that were put up for sale were priced within the reach of those who had an income of $6, 500. 00. For those who had incomes of $5, 000 or less there was virtua lly no housing for sale within the price range of these people, no housing at all.

I might point out that MHRC had 5, 000 applications last year and as further units are built the applications pour in in greater volume, in fact MHRC has some prett y long waiting lists right now. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to deal with some of the opposition that has developed over the past years to the hous ing program. Mr . Speaker, code words are now the order of the day. A teacher no longer says that orie of his students is a brat because he misbehaves, he will say that the child is having some problems of communication within· his peer group. He's ac ting out.

This in practical terms may mean that he's beating up the stu dent in the next desk. - (Interjec tion) -- Yes, he's adjus ting to his environment. In the Ame rican south the politician no longer promises to keep the Negroes in their place as he used to do. Po liticians used to be quite honest and quite blunt -- (I nterjection) -- Some. He no longer promises to keep the Negroes in their place, he uses code words like "law and order" or "a man's home is his castle" or he's against-- he's agin busi ng. But when he says this, the audience, the listeners know what he•s talking about.

They kllow that he means he'll keep the Negroes in their place, he' ll keep the blacks in their place. Now today, Mr. Speaker, -- (Inter jection) -- I underst and they're agin busi ng there too. MR. SPE AKER: Order, please. Order. MR. JOHANNSON: Mr. Speaker, the major social and political battle of the 70's has already begun in the United States and this is the battle of the suburbs, this is the battl e of the suburbs to exclude, to close the gates against poor people, against multi ple-unit low income housi ng. Mr.

Speaker, two years ago host ility started to develop in the suburbs of Manitoba to the public housing program, and before I deal with the development of those hosti lities I'd like to deal with the situation in the United States and I think it then becomes clear that what is happen ing in Winnipeg is simp ly a northward extension of what is happening throughout the continent. The tactics as I said have become a little more subtle. Here, for example, is an

article from Newsweek which shows a billboard erected in Jefferson, Louisiana. The Billboard reads : "Jefferson. It's a Good Life, Let's keep it that way. " These are of course code words and th ey clearly mean in Jeffersov, Louisiana, to keep out the blacks, to keep out the poor people and it's -'-(I nterjection) -- A great many of them are, yes .

It's becoming increasingly clear that this is basically a class conflict rather than a colour conflict and this is becoming apparent because middle class blacks are st arting to join the white middle class opposition in the suburbs to the entry of multiple-unit low income hous ing. A second tactic developed by the suburbs are what are called "C adillac requirements" and I believe the suburbs in Winnipeg could be kept in mind when we're talking about this .

The suburbs have developed building codes that require very expensive building materials , costl y si dewalks and so on; and a third tactic is what•s known as "snob zoning", and this is the final and the most effective weapon of the se gregationists. Means that the zoning permits only single family homes to be built on large lots and this effectively keeps out multiple units, low income public house of the townhouse variety. In Manitoba the suburbs began their battle against public housing in St. James -- and I'm sorry that the Member for Stur geon Creek isn• t here.

They began their battle against public housing in Heritage Park and their tactics originally were very crude. They claimed that poor people coming in would depress property values, create a slum in Heritage Park. Tactics were very crude. It's ironic by the way that the public housing that was built in Heritage Park probably upgraded the area; judging by the architecture, by the planning, it's a far superior

March 21, 1972 273 (MR. JOHANNSON cont•d) . . . . . kind of housing to the private housing in the. area. I'd like to now look at the present tactics being used by the suburbs to fight public housing - and the tactics have been refined. I'd like to quote from an

article printed in the South Winnipeg "Viewpoint" by one Donald Craik A MEMBER: Who? MR. JOJIANNSON: Donald Craik is the name. A MEMBER: The Member for Riel? MR. JOHANNSON: The :Member for Riel, the Honourable Member for Riel. The

article is entitled "A New Monster, the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation in St. Vital." Rather a motive word "new monster". When I read the -- ah, we have one of the suburban members back. I'd start again but .I'm afraid I don't have enough time and I don't think the mem ber would appreciate it anyway. This

article is really remarkable. --(Interjection) -- No, I wouldn't, it's an incredible effort really when you consider that this was written by a man who was formerly a Minister of the Crown and when you read this

article you really develop ari admiration for the toughness of democracy. If it could survive Ministers like that it's pretty damn tough, Let's see what Mr. Craik is doing to the people. He makes a number of statements that are misstatements -- and I'm sorry again that he's not here. He says, for example, that St. Vital has seen a number of developments in the past few years which have been sponsored through the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation and he gives as one example, a develop ment on Beliveau. Well it happens to be the only example of public housing that's been built in St.

Vital, but he's talking about a number of developments. Then a little later on he talks about "the recent activities of the Corporation open up a serious question as to whether they have gone too far in trying to force their autocratic opinions on the area." One gets the im pression that vast numbers of projects are being foisted upon the people of the area; they've had one. He then starts talking about river property on this avenue containing 15 acres and he talks about the Housing and Renewal Corporation going in without consulting the various local bodies.

Any private developer does exactly the same thing and Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corpora tion has always insisted that it will operate like a private developer and that in terms of zoning it wants to be treated as a private developer is treated. Another rather strange thing is, "the strangest aspect," and I quote, "of the entire deal is that the Housing and Renewal Corporation did not plan to develop the property itself but were going to sell it to a private developer of their choice." And the implication is of course that the Corporation is financing or helping with public funds some private developers.

He never mentions the fact that this private developer that he refers to is a co-op group, the Village Canadian Co- op -- housing co-op. Pardon my pronunciation. This is the private developer that he's talking about. He also talks about -- and this is perhaps the most significant thing in the whole

article -- talks about the beauties of the property. "The property in question has a singular virtue, namely that it's probably the most beautiful piece of undeveloped river pro perty left inside the Perimeter Highway in St. Vital, lovely piece of property. It is the sort of property that would be very much in demand in due course by many private individuals who would likely build single family homes." In otre r words, the property is too good for poor people, should be reserved for people who can afford single family homes.

There's a certain degree of contempt there for the poor that I really don't very much like. He uses all the code words of course to justify the exclusion of poor people. He talks about difficulties of servicing, of community facilities. The services, by the way, are one · block away, within a block. This is a very difficult area to service. He talks about over crowding of the schools, of a particular school.

And in that respect he is misleading the public because the co-op had no intention of sending its children to this school, it was going to send them to a new bilingual school that was in the process, or that was going to be constructed. I'd also like to deal with a second example of how suburban politicians are fighting the battle of the suburbs to keep out low income housing. And this relates to Charleswood. The interesting thing about this

article is that again all of the code words are brought up, "over crowding of schools," "drainage problems," "problems of servicing." But the Member for Charleswood made a very significant statement. He said, and I quote: "Mayor Moug said and agreed that it was too good a property for that type of construction . " He was talking about multiple- unit public housing. It was too good a property for that kind of construction; it should be reserved for single family dwellings, people who could afford it.

274 March 21, 1972 (MR, JOHANNSON cont1d) Mr. Speaker, we don't intend. to allow the segregationists to prevail. The Manitoba Housing Corporation has followed a policy of building small developments, 14 to 73 units in size on the average of a human scale and they followed a policy of scattering them throughout the city, and so far because development land has been available at economic prices for pro jects of this scale in the suburbs most of the public housing projects have been built in the suburbs.

However, with co-operation from the City of \\'innipeg we hope to build public housing uii.its on scattered sites within the inner city area. We're determined to develop our society in Winnipeg, in Manitoba in such a way that we can avoid the class war that• s developed in some American cities and so that we can create a society in which people can live in harmony. I'd like now to talk about some of the criticism that were made by the members of the Liberal Party.

The House Leader of the Liberal Party, the Member for Portage said, and I quote: "The Speech from the Throne proudly reports that the construction of new housing con tinues at an increased rate. What it doesn't say is that the m as si ve increase of government as opposed to private building is the only thing that has kept us going. The private housing sector has all but been pushed out of Manitoba.

The NDP Government says it's going to build 21, 000 new houses and promptly sets out to do so but at the same time it practically puts the private sector out of business, so where's the gain." The Honourable Member from Portage insists on flaunting his ignorance for all of lis to see. He claims that we're driving the private sector out of business and yet every housing unit financed by MHRC, by the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation, is being built by private contractors, by private developers, by tte private sector. Perhaps he would prefer that we do it by Crown corporation.

If he does we'd like him to make the suggestion. If it weren't for the fact that Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation is carrying on such an extensive program the housing business in this province would be in as rough shape as it was in Saskatchewan under Thatcher and as it is in Quebec. There's a decrease and there has been over the last couple of years in the number of starts in the private sector and there is a very simple reason for this. In 1968 and in 1969 developers overbuilt in a luxury apart ment sector of the housing market.

Actually the housing developers welcome our public housing program because it takes up the slack that has developed in the private housing sector. I might point out an additional advantage of our program. Our housing program has pro duced 4, 000 construction jobs during the past year. It's a pretty significant number. How many did CFI create? Five hundred? They were mainly from Quebec weren't they?

The hous ing construction program of MHRC in the past year created roughly 4, 000 construction jobs in the province and it was a significant factor in keeping our unemployment rate at one of the low est in the country. Rather than putting the private sector out of business we had kept a signifi cant

section of it in business. The Housing Corporation is not competing with the private sector, it's filling needs for which reasons of financing and lower profit levels private developers and financiers have been unwilling to satisfy. Vacancy rate levels for low income family housing in \Vinii.ipeg is now less than one percent. CMHC considers four percent a normal and healthy vacancy level which gives people a freedom of choice in selecting accommodation. Mr.

Johnston also said -- pardon me, the Honourable Member for Portage also said that in effect, and I quote: It says, in effect, "That the private sector can build luxury accommoda tion but the mass market will be looked after by government-sponsored enterprise. " We have the dubious distinction of having no program which encourages individual home ownership but rather programs which spend tens of millions to insure that approximately ten percent of the people will become tenants of the government.

Certainly there is a vacancy rate in a certain sector of the private market, the luxury apartment sector, and those developers who have kept their rents high, who haven't lowered them, in some cases because they had to keep them high in order to pay off mortgages which they acquired at high interest rates, those developers have had high vacancy rates, but those who have lowered rents have had little difficulty in filling their blocks, It's also interesting that the vacancy rates that we have were calculated in June by CMHC.

At that time the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation had exactly 54 units occupied in the City of Winii.ipeg, 54 units of family housing which would have exactly no impact at all upon the vacancy rates calculated by CMHC. The last statement that the Honourable Member for Portage made, that we have no pro grams which encourage home ownership again illustrates the practice of the opposition to make statements without doing any homework. There are four housing programs, MHRC housing

March 21, 1972 275 (l\IR, JOHANNSON cont'd) . . . . . programs, that encourage home ownership, No. 1. The remote housing program. No. 2. Housing for sale at full recovery price with low interest mor tgages and units ha\'e been built for sale in Transcona, Charleswood, St. Vital and North and Eas t Kildonan. No. 3. The Housing Corporation has encouraged the development of condominiums, in particular the condominium in Tuxedo, Taiwani Towers. And No. 4. The Corporation is encouraging sweat equity co-ops, particularly in Thompson.

These programs illustrate that Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation has a variety of programs. Not oi:Jly this of course but this year the Manitoba Government pioneered the pensioner home r'epair pro gram. The purpose of this is , of course, to cre.ate employment and at the same time to up grade and to help pensioners to repair their homes. I think this is an area in which the Prov incial Government will have to have broader programs in the future after we have expanded housing stock.

The Opposition continually portrays us as dreamers and theoris ts, dogmatists who have little contact with the hard realities of the business world and yet in housing it is this government that are the hard . . , MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I wonder if the hum around the room is realiy the echo of the acoustics or the members . I wish they would co-operate so I could hear what's going on. The honourable member has five and a half minutes. MR. JOHANNSON: I'll st op before that, Mr. Speaker.

The Oppos ition insist that they're the hard headed men of business and that we are the dreamers and theoris ts, and yet in this particular area it is this party, this government that are the hard headed men of action. We insist on deaHng with economic realities not with a vague free enterprise utopia that never existed except in the dreams of Adam Smith. The hard reality is that if the Manitoba Housi ng and Renewal Corporation program were discontinued the results would be, l. No new housi ng st ock created; No. 2. No new jobs created; No. 3. No economic spin-off from the capital spending constructi on; No. 4.

No pressure of an expanding hous ing supply and the low income sector to keep rents at a reasonable rate in the private markets . Mr. Speaker, increasing the housing supply is the only effective way of actually tackling the housing problems of low income people. It 's one of the very effective ways of attacking inflation in a very vital area. The Oppos ition attacks the Government for failing to deal with inflation and yet in this program we're dealing in a very effective way with that very problem and at the same time we're providing very badly needed hous ing st ock. Thank you. MR.

SPE AKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I feel constrained to re-enter this debate for a few minutes in its dying hour tonight to support my colleague, ·the Honourable Member for Lakeside and to defend my Leader the Leader of the Official Oppositi on and the Leader of my party against the unfair, ill-considered and unstatesma i:Jlike attack launched on him in this Chamber last night by the Firs t Minister of this province. Mr.

Speaker, I do not know what the general reaction of Manitobans will be to the remarks and the personal attack launched by the First Minist er last night, but I tell you, Si r, that I am profoundly disappointed. l\IR, SPE AKER: Order, please. The First Minister on a point of privilege. MR. SCHREYER: Yes , on a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. The Member for Fort Garry intimates that I launched a personal attack. I think I have a right to ask that he identify what constituted that personal attack .

I say as a point of privilege, Sir, that I acknowledged last night, that the Leader of the Opposi tion wasn't here and that I regretted that, because I would much .prefer to tell him what I had to say to his face. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I made no allusion to any kind of impropriety on the First Minis ter's part, with respect to the presence of the Leader of the Conservative Part y and the Opposition in this Chamber, or his absence from the Chamber.

I say that in the main that his address last night was a personal attack on the conduct of the Leader of the Oppos itio� as a parliamentary leader and a political leader, he suggested -- and if he doubts my interpreta tion of it, he has the public pres s, he has the newspapers to refer to --. He suggested that the Leader of my Party and the Leader of the Oppositi on had som ehow misre presented, misled and distorted the kinds of political iss ues and questions that we are confronted with in this govern ment and the kinds of programs that this government has attempted to introduce in this province. MR.

SPE AKER: The Honourable First Minist er. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I rise now on a point of order because in the light

276 March 21, 19 72 (MR. SCHREYER cont'd) . . . . . of the explanation just given by the Member for Fort Garry, I withdraw my point of privilege. I certainly agree that I did make an attack on the kind of unethical distortion that's been carried out. I agree, the Member for Fort Garry is right. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I respect the position that the First Minister has just articulated at this juncture.

I say that I wish to defend my leader against that attack, against the argument, the presentation that the First Minister of the Province directed against him and I say that I do not know what the reaction of most Manitobans will be, but I am pro foundly disappointed in that address by the First Minister; because, Sir, whether my friends on the other side are prepared to acknowledge it or recognize it or not, like my colleague, the Member for Lakeside, who said when the First Minister of this Province has a point of privilege, I sit down and allow him to raise it, or any other point of argument or debate, I respect the First Minister of this Province , as all Manitobans do, and I say that the kind of argument that he carried to and deposited at the doorstep of the Leader of my party and the Leader of the Opposition last night, was beneath him and it lowered the tenor and the temper of debate in this House.

I was disappointed, because despite my political differences with the First Minister, he is the First Minister of the Province. He is therefore my First Minister, he's the First Minister of all Manitobans, and I say, Sir, that he indulged in a highly questionable kind of exercise and personal invective against my Leader.

When my colleague from Lakeside en deavoured justifiably last night and earlier today, to return some of the salvos that were launched against my Leader, then he became a target for personal invective -- not from the First Minister, but for personal invective and personal abuse and villification from pockets on the government side, in the government benches. This, Sir, has become typical of this govern ment -- this is a typical parliamentary tactic of this government; ignore the issues, don't fight on the issues, but fight on the level of personalities.

Try to pursue personal attack, try to win personal advantage by doing as much kind of personal damage in debate and argument as you possibly can, but for heaven's sake don't cloud or distort the battle by bringing in the issues. Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote one paragraph from tonight's Free Press report on the First Minister's Address of last night which I think underscores and underlines the point that we have been trying to make on this side throughout the Throne Speech debate. I quote from the main Free Press report on the First Minister's remarks - - I take responsibility for reading it correctly.

"Although he was speaking during the Throne Speech Debate, Premier Schreyer made no substantial reference to the Throne Speech itself and concentrated his re marks entirely on Mr. Spivak's speech." Mr. Speaker, this is the position that we have insisted over and over again in this debate has been the hallmark of the government exercise and the governmen t position, the fact that they have not, any one of them, not a single member on that side, had the political courage to stand up and defend the Throne Speech, other than the mover -- I take that back, Mr. Speaker.

Of course the mover of the address in reply and the seconder did so , that was their function, but aside from that, there wasn't one member who really had the political courage to defend the Throne Speech and defend the record of the government as it was defined in that Throne Speech. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The Member for Osborne. Point of privilege. MR. TURNBULL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Member for Fort Garry is alleging that none of us on this side made any reference to the Throne Speech and defended it, and I might point out to him in case he wasn't here that I did mention that I was happy to see a new Labour Code mentioned in the Throne Speech. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr.

Speaker, perhaps it was because what I really had in mind was that only those members on the other side to whom we were listening and in whose remarks we were interested, was there any kind of cogent reference to the government program as out lined in the Throne Speech. Mr.

Speaker, the test will come fairly soon as to how many Manitobans are deluded by this kind of sham exercise in politicking and how many Manitobans are still under any illusions about the fairness or the propriety or the justice of the parliamentary program of this govern ment, and I say that the crux of the wh ole question revolving around the remarks that the First

March 21, 1972 277 (MR. SHERl\:IAN cont'd) . . . . . . Minister made last night is a crux, a pivot of political courage. I have no doubt whatever, about the personal or the physical courage of the First Minister, but I suggest to you, Sir, that he is a political coward. He won't call the Wolseley by-election.

He refuses to give the people of Wolseley representation in this Chamber and yet he stands up there for 80 minutes last evening and expounds what he believes are the strengths and the hallmarks of the program of this government and the reasons why it should recommend itself to the people. \\'ell I should think that if he had the political courage of his convictions he'd be prepared to ask the people of Wolseley for a mandate on that record. He's not prepared to do that obviously, Sir, and the only challenge that I throw back to him from this side in the wake of his address last night is th at one.

To put his political courage where his political words are, to put his money in effect where his political speech is and call that by-e lection in Wolseley and let us see just how broad a description there is -- (Interjection) -- Yes, I will. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, would the Honourable Member for Fort Garry agree that if one were to take all of the by-elections that have been called by this government and average out the aggregate of the total lapse of months between the vacancy and the calling of the by-election, average out the aggregate of it, and to do the same thing with respect to the ten years of the Conservative administration with respect to the calling of by-e lections, and if the result should show that the average length of time la:g or the time lag is less in our case, would he agree then that there is greater political courage? MR.

SHERMAN: Well, I think I might agree that there might be a greater demonstration of political-- there might have been a difference in the demonstration of political expediency, political opportunism and perhaps my party was guilty of exorcise of political opportunism, but you, Sir-- Mr.

Speaker, through you to the First Minister -- the First Minister is the First Minister of this province and he has set himself up and I suggest that in my experience in politics his party has set itself up as a party that is above that kind of crass politicking, that crass search for opportunity, he in fact has been perhaps trapped unwisely, unwittingly into suggesting in public interviews in recent months that there would be no untoward or unnecessary delay in terms of filling the representation for Wolseley. And Mr.

Speaker, when he stands in the Chamber as he did last night and indulges in the kind of attack, the kind of salvo against my leader and preaches the type of sermon about NDP activities and NDP achievements and NDP ideals and prospects for this province, that he did for 80 minutes, and then doesn't have the courage to back it up by putting that question to the people, by asking for a mandate from them in a constituency that now has not been effectively represented for some five or six months, perhaps even longer, if one wants to count the period of illness of the former member, then I suggest to you that that is an example of political cowardice, and the challenge is clear to the First Minister, Sir.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, order, order. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker. l\IR, SPEAKER: Order, Order. MR. SHERl\IAN: Mr. Speaker, in the light of that present situation where Wolseley is concerned, I think it takes a self assurance, perhaps bordering on arrogance for anybody on that side of the House to accuse us of audacity -- and that word has often, that accusation has often been levelled at us. The First Minister himself has accused former ministers of the Crown on the front benches of this side ofthe House of audacity with respect to the positions they have taken in debate.

Well I ask you, Sir, what greater example of audacity of that kind have we had in this Chamber in the life of this Legislature than this one, where this government delivers a vapid and innocuous Throne Speech that no one has the interest or courage to defend and the First Minister indulges in 80 minutes of attack on my Leader and of contrived defence of the kinds of things his government is doing and won't put it to the test. I'm not through,Doug. MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, my point of privilege is that the Member from Fort Garry states repeatedly that I engaged in an SO-minute attack on his leader. I would like , and I believe the record will show, that it was 80 minutes of exposure of Conservative past practices and criticisms; it was not, Sir, an attack on his leader as he puts it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris.

278 March 21, 1972 MR. WARNER H, JORGENSON (Morris): full well that is no point of privilege and I wish he would desist from rising on these phony points of privilege constantly interjecting members of this side of the House. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. ·MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, yes. -- (Interjection) -- It becomes a point of order as a result of the interjection, and perhaps better to describe ejaculation from the Honourable Member from Morris. He has interceded himself into the debate suggesting that what I have raised is not a point of privilege, I will leave that to you, Sir.

The Member for Morris is hardly the world's best authority as to what constitutes a point of privilege. I submit to you, Sir, that it is a point of privilege when a member continues to make an allegation which is false; at some point in time that constitutes a point of privilege. MR. SPEAKER: Does the Honourable Member for Fort Garry wish to speak on the point of order too? The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. E:r{NS: On the point of order then, Sir.

I think for the benefit and for the clarifica tion of all members present, we would appreciate, Sir, from you a particular ruling on the statements just made by the First Minister; if in fact you believe, Sir, as Chief Magistrate of this Assembly that the First Minister did have a point of privilege. MR . SPEAKER: At the moment I don't have it at hand but a matter of privilege is when there is a personal attack on a member.

I should like to say in this instance, since everybody now has cooled off and is willing to listen, that the Honourable Member for Fort Garry was making allegations of a direct charge and the Honourable First Minister was correct in bringing it to the attention of the House. I should like to ask the Honourable Member from Fort Garry to really consider his words, as to how he expresses them. Debate is allowed, there's a lot of leeway allowed, but I do think impugning or asserting that a member has done something which he has not done, which the House is aware of, one should not do.

The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I accept your ruling, Sir, but I say to the First Minister, through you, Sir, that if he will check Hansard tomorrow I believe he will find that I did not say what he accuses me of-- what he suggests I said. I did not say that he indulged in an SO minute a.ttack on my leader which is what the First Minister suggests I said. I said he indulged in 80 minutes of attack on my Leader and defence of the government program. MR , SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR.

PAULLEY: I do believe, Sir, that you did make the ruling, which I understood was accepted by all of the members of the House, and then my friend the Honourable Member .. . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Order, please. Order, please. The Honourable Member is entitled to give an explanation. The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, the First Minister accused us in his remarks last night of adhering to the concept and the philosophy of growth at any cost. Well I suggest this to you, Mr.

Speaker, that perhaps with all the difficulties that ensued, it may be better for this prov ince to have a philosophy of growth at any cost than a philosophy of no growth at any cost, which is the kind of philosophy that seems to be recommending itself to this administration, and through this administration to the people of Manitoba today. Or as my colleague from Lakeside suggests a planned down-turn in the economy which was referred to specially by -- I believe it was the Attorney- General in an earlier stage of this debate. Primarily, Mr.

Speaker, my challenge revolves around the one I mentioned a moment or two ago about the necessity for giving the people of V:olseley the chance to have representa tion in this House, and had I had an opportunity to ask the First Minister a question last night after his remarks, that was the only question I was going to ask him. It wasn't possible to do so but the only question was that one. On the strength of what he has said, on the strength of his remarks last night, on the strength of his pride in the achievement)n the accomplishment in the promise of this government will he now call the Wolseley by-election.

Trere are a number of other points that I would like to make reference to but I have an agreement with the Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre, Mr. Speaker, who hasn't had a chance to enter this debate as yet,_ and I told him at the time when we discussed it, since I had been in the debate earlier I would only take a few minutes this evening and leave him some time on the clock. But I leave the First Minister with that challenge and with that question.

Not only the people in Wolseley but all the people in Manitoba and certainly my leader will be interested in an answer to the question as to how prepared, how committed, how thoroughly

March 21, 1972 279 (MR. SHERMAN cont'd) . . convinced he is that his programs are good enough to take to the people. Until he does that, he's a paper tiger and the government a toothless wonder. MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable the Attorney-General. MR.

MACKLING: The Honourable Member from Fort Garry is imputing to me a state ment in this House which is false, and I would like him to refer to Hansard of Tuesday, March 14th, Volume 29, No. 4, Page 60, approximately middle of the page, where I was referring to the problem of the economy -- and I was talking in respect to the nation here and what we in Manitoba had prepared in expectation of the problems in our economy. And I said, "Well, Mr.

Speaker, the effective public works of this government has been the envy of all other provinces in Canada." And then I said, "We plan to meet the anticipated down-turn in our economy, a down-turn that was fostered, that was fostered by an approach to economic deter minism that the Honourable Member from Portage should well recall. " And then I went on to indicate . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I have no desire to hear all the speech of the Honourable Attorney-General all over again. --(Interjection) -- that•s not the point. The point is -- order, please.

I wish the honourable member would make his matter of privilege so that it can be either answered or adjudicated and we can get on with the business of the House. The Attorney-General. MR. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I assumed that's what I was doing. There wasn't a convenient break. Now I would like, Mr.

Speaker, having drawn that to the attention of the Member from Fort Garry, to have the Speaker determine whether or not in fact the Member for Fort Garry did not paraphrase my remarks in a manner which impugned my integrity and the integrity of this House, because he indicated in the remarks,he said that we had planned a down-turn of our economy. That is completely false and I think it's a matter of personal privilege. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, speaking to the same point of privilege.

Insofar as that I was reasonably attentive at the time the Attorney-General was making his address and reason ably quick to pick up the particular remark he made, I'm afraid, Sir, that I would have to con sider making a relatively serious charge in this Chamber, that unless I heard the voice tran scripts of that particular passage of Hansard, I suggest that Hansard has been doctored. MR. SPEAKER: That is a reflection upon my office and I really consider -- the Honourable Minister of Labour wish to say something? MR. PAULLEY: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I just want to say to my honourable friend, through you, Sir, that that is a very grave accusation to make and I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that the tapes are not destroyed, that before my honourable friend the Member for Lakeside makes such an accusation that he avail himself of the opportunity of hearing the voice transcript by the tapes before in effect accusing the staff of Hansard of doctoring Hansard. To me, Mr.

Speaker, this is a very grave accusation, and I'm sure, Sir, that on reflection a man of the integrity of the Honourable Member for Lakeside; and on reflection, would not want to leave his accusation stand on the tape as it appears at the present time, that he would -- and in due respect to my honourable friend, -- (Interjection) -- no, my colleague the Minister of Finance says it cannot be erased, and I appreciate th at, Mr.

Speaker, but I'm wondering whether or not my honourable friend from Lakeside on reflection would consider the accusation levied by him on the staff of Hansard and say that he would accept the point that I am trying to raise and avail himself of the opportunity of hearing the voice transcript rather than the accusation of the printed transcript. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Chairman, I thought that my first statement made that very clear, the seriousness of the concern that I was expressing,and I would assume that in expressing th at concern I would be receiving from the House Leader an invitation to hearing those tapes. I also make it . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The tapes belong under the jurisdiction of the Speaker. When you lay that charge you lay it against the office of the Speaker and his staff. I would ask the honourable member to consider what he's saying, to make up his mind he•s serious. The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, I have to on the one hand accept what I believe I heard and on the other hand accept what I see two or three days later that is printed. I welcome the invitation, not necessarily myself or in the company of the House Leader of the government side and the

280 March 21, 1972 (MR. ENNS cont'd) . . . . . company of the House Leader of our side, to listen to those tapes and certainly then I'll be prepared to withdraw the statement. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre. THRONE SPEECH DEBATE �R. J, R. (BUD) BOYCE (Winnipeg Centre): Mr. Speaker, this has been a terrific experience because in wondering whether I should enter the debate at all I have had occasion to redraft the speech about seven times.

First of all when the Leader of the Opposition res ponded I was tempted to write one type of a speech, and then after the Member for Fort Garry got up I was tempted to write another type of speech, and then after -- member by member they got up, I was tempted to shift to try and write a different kind of speech because every time somebody got up over there they stole my thunder.

So perhaps in the few remaining moments depart from tradition by saying that I congratulate everybody that should be congrat ulated, and perhaps only singling out the Member for Minnedosa for special thanks because I have respect for his predecessor in that seat; he was instrumental in me learing some of the lessons of the House, or in the House, and also as our former Minister of Highways said, he was one of the best Highway Ministers that this province has ever had, and I too hold that opinion, so he has a standard to live up to.

Of all the speeches that have been made, you know on both sides of the House, I would just like to perhaps attend to one point that was made by the Member for Fort Garry just a few moments ago. That was the length of time in calling by-elections. I would perhaps refresh your memory in the length of time that elapsed between the death of Mr. Gray and perhaps the resignation of our present Premier -- the length of time that elapsed between the resignation and the death and calling the election.

I think perhaps you'll find it was four, five, six months or so, seven months, I haven't -- (Interjection) -- well I think statutory it would have to be within the year. But, Mr. Speaker, in coming down to perhaps making some contribution to the Throne Speech debate or an address to His Honour in gratitude for the Throne Speech, to sit down and write out a speech or react to something that has been said on the other side, I really didn't think I could accomplish much.

When the Member for Emerson stands up and he hurls a few innuendos across the floor, I would like to dash out and scream at him too you know, when he mentions about Macbeth,it 's "lay on MacDuff and curse thee he that first cries hold, enough". Because I would give quarter not to him or anyone else on the other side in a fair debate. But I don't think that would accomplish much. To develop a line of debate in parallel to the 1\Iember for Fort Garry who is prone to bring before the House his prowess in the English language, to drag in . . . and emphasis by repetition, .parallel construction.

Perhaps I could do that also and like him too, leave a few split infinitives and dangling participles and all the rest of it. But after -- (Interjection) - the Member for Thompson thinks I'm talking in Greek again. But after the Member for Lakeside -- excuse me the Acting Leader of the Opposition -- paid such flowering tribute to the former Deputy Speaker, and listening to the Member for Minnedosa in his admonitions, I thought, no I'd be nice and I will not be provoked.

But one thing I would just like to draw to the attention of this House, and especially the members on the other side, is their suggestion that this government is falling apart. I see no signs of it. I have to confess though, I'll share something with him. I almost believed it; you know I did.

Here a few months ago, it was very strange how it came about, I was standing in the hall with my colleague from Thompson and the Press was there relative to some appointments that were made to the Cabinet and they asked my colleague what his reaction was and he told them in his usual way, and they turned to me and they said, you know, what was my reaction.

And I tried to play the politician, I guess, and I said something like -- well something in politics that I have learned is you have to con tinually reassess your position and right at the minute I am reassessing mine and I'll be in Ottawa on Friday and I'm going to talk to Eric Kierans, which was correct. It just so happened it didn't come out that way because there was a Professional Association meeting that didn't get their business done so I didn't get to Ottawa, but anyway-- I was kinda nervous then, you see.

I was kinda nervous and I thought perhaps you know, perhaps this jazz they were getting is right, you know, this government going off in a direction that I particularly couldn't sub scribe to. So, I did, I talked to people whose political opinion I respect. Some of them on the other side of the House by the way. This is a confession- - I learned from my colleague down

March 21, 1972 281 (MR, BOYCE cont'd) . . . . there, I'm bearing all tonight. But after having discussed this situation with the people whose political opinion I respect, I reassessed my situation and I found out that I could make no better contribution than where I was -- and it really wasn't relative to whether the Member for St. Boniface was in or out of the Cabinet, you know, because we have had our differences even back in '36, 137, '38, '39, he used to run over me with a football. I didn't particularly like. it and he's still running over me with a ·football; he• s in the Cabinet and I' m not.

Now some people may interpret that as childish petulance on my part but I don't think it was. Perhaps it was but I don't think it was. But is this a manifestation of government falling apart. I don• t think so. Now with reference to the resignation of the Minister of Highways at the time -- is this a manifestation of government falling apart? I really don't think so. Was the stepping down of the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources a sign of government falling apart? I don't think so. In fact if it's anything, Mr.

Speaker, it is a manifestation of the conviction of the people on this side of the House that they are going to see that the people of Manitoba get the best type of government they can come heaven, hell or high water. Heretofore under the types of structures we've had, everybody that has had personal goals that they have striven for has kinda put themselves in a place, well gee, maybe I'm next in the Cabinet so therefore I better behave myself. Or gee I got to stay in the Cabinet so I got to do this thing. The people of Manitoba should know now this doesn't cut any ice with this group.

Now the people on the other side, you know, they use such expressions as pony boys, messenger boys, you know, -- (Interjection) -- I won't be provoked even by you. You've tried it, I'm getting to you in a minute. The idea that we're a bunch of Schreyer boys, you know they keep throwing this over -- that I couldn• t have got Winnipeg Centre if it hadn•t have been for the Premier of this province. There may be some truth in that, I don't think there is, I don't think -- (Interjection) -- you can hear it coming across again. He ain't got me convinced.

I'm sorry, I think I could have won Winnipeg Centre with the Member for Inkster. The New Democratic Party made the choice and I think it was an excellent choice. But it isn•t, you know they keep throwing-- they're so used to this leadership of cult. Boy)are you guys in trouble trying to get that underwear salesman in, you know trying to develop this man, you know, they're trying to inject charisma or whatever you call it into your national leader. You're not doing so good because you people by and large, have relied on this type of a system for so long that you project it on everybody that's associated with you.

I'm sorry we just don't play that game. Out of the debate -- (Interjection) -- Well, Mr. Speaker, they pulled a Sandy MacPherson on me because I was going to go to Minnedosa to see John Diefenbaker because I happen to, I admire him as a politician. But they switched the date because Mr. Diefenbaker was sick over in Scotland and he couldn't get there. But I had fully intended to go. -- (Inter jection) -- Where? Nobody gets sick in Ireland. But, Mr.

Speaker, if there 's one thing, if there's one that come out of this debate, the one thing that come out of this debate, finally, finally, the Liberals have shown us, you know, what their party policy is all the way across Canada. One thing that they agree on all the way across the country -- get the Auditor-General. It doesn't make any difference whether it's Ottawa or here. This is their policy, get the Auditor-General. I don't know -- they're starting to work, they might get power here in another 15 years but they've got to start now to get rid of the one we've got. -- ( Interjection) -- I beg your pardon?

Well I'm going to need about six glasses of water. If I was hired as a strategist by the Conservative Party, I couldn't develop a better strategy than the one that the opposition has arlopted because the opposition-- you know you're no opposition and there's no opposition. You know families have the habit of fighting among themselves. If there's, you know, an out sider attacks the family, the family usually coerces and sticks together. So if I was hired as a strategist I'd do just exactly what you do, you're doing.

But the Member for Inkster has given you guys good advice all along the years but you've never followed it, so I doubt very much if they'll follow mine. But as we move on in this late hour of the debate I would like to refer to the address by His Excellency. (Mr. Boyce spoke French here) I think I'd better continue in English because I don't want to set bilingualism back 50 years. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR, ENNS: . . . Assembly to . . . MR, SPEAKER: ... point of order. MR, ENNS: . . . Province to a republic that we refer to you, or we have a president in

282 March 21, .1972 (M R. ENNS cont'd) . . . . . the General Asse mbly? MR. SPE AKER: The Honourable 11ember . . •. I don't know whether the honourable member was serious or not but in response to his point of .order that he raised the interpreta tion is used both as President and . . . so he can have his choice. The Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre. ·MR. BOYCE: (F rench spoken here) I'll continue in English. But, l\Ir.

Speaker, I am quite interested in the mess age of His Honour in this regard especially when I pick up the Liquor Control Commissi on's report for 1971 and I see that ther e's $30 million going into the coffers from the sale of alcohol in the province and I hope that a goodly portion of this will be ass igned to the treatment of some of the problems relative to the problem of alcoholism. I am encouraged by some of the programs that ! know will be announced later by the Minister of Health and Social Development which I am sure will put us in the forefront as far as this particular social problem is concerned.

Now having learned from my friend, the Member for Ste. Rose, and also by the good example of the acting Leader of the Opposi tion, when you want to talk to the press you st and here and you look at them -- (Interjection) -- then you wave your hands. But I'd be remiss if I didn't, you know, knock the press or some thing. But I really don't want to knock them be ca us e I was kind of hopeful the night that they announced that the Member for Fort Rouge had joined the NDP, I thought that was good.

But one thing I was kind of, you know, shaken up about was one of the papers ran an ad and it was a notice of public meetings and it was one that was signed by me and I really didn• t draw at tention to it, or draw attention to it, until it appeared as a reprint in the -- this august jcurnal of the Law Society, no The Manitoba Bar Associat ion Newsletter, Head Notes and Foot Notes, and it says in this advertisement, which was apparently si gned by myself, "T he Special Committee of the Legislature on Profess ional Associ ations will hold public meetings to receive putic repres entations on the following matters" and I was kind of at a loss to know what a public meeting was for pubic repres enta tions .

But there was one that I was much more interested in -- this isn't one of the local papers, this is the Interlake News -- and Mr. Speaker, I would like the First Minister to pay st rict attention to this because maybe -- it says here that there was 75 guests at the opening including Bud Boyce, Minister of Industry and Commerce. But they only spelled it with a sm all "m " -- (Interjections) -- Oh, I st ill haven't given my speech about Greece, have I got that one . . . But I just wanted to get that in about the press . I couldn• t let them get away with it.

One of the things that was mentioned in pas sing by the Minister of Indus try and Commerce, by the real Minister of Industry and Commerce, not the small "m ", was the work being done in the rural area on the rede velopment by the regional development corporations . . . I don't know how many of you had the opportunit y of seeing the Caravan which has been travelling around through the southern part of Manitoba, and just for the information of the Member for Thompson so uthern Manitoba is below 53, below 53.

And this, Mr, Speaker, is really the first attempt to get the information to the people in this area so that they can see where they st and relative to the rest of the province; what their past performance has been as far as growth is concerned; how industry is congregating in certain parts of the province, so that they could have some logical base for their own individual community aspirations am as a resu lt of these conversa tions that have been held with the people in the 75 communities in southern Manitoba, the Regional Development Corporat ions in the areas have already st arted to forward recommenda tions to the Department of Industry and Commerce which should form the basis for future projections .

Now, Mr. Speaker, because of the procedural hassle that we had a few moments ago, we -- I'm kind of trying to rush things and I'm not the best or reorganizers. -- (Inter je ctions) -- No, I'm not going to tell jokes. I'm going to mention some thing about my public arguments with the Member from Thompson. Oh, in sp eaking about the press I think every body in the Hous e should be on the mailing lis t of my provincial constit uency newspaper. This is Nick Ternette1s rag. Now, you know, that's an interes ting point, Mr. Chairman, or Mr. Speaker.

I will de fend Nick Ternette's rightto be president of this constitu ency organization, and I'll defend him; I'll defend the Member for Thompson1s right to sit on the ste ps ; I'll walk to court with him. In fact I even offered to se rve part of his jail sentence if he went to jail. I believe in defending right no matter where it . . . Just to .clarify the record rather than try and explain it I will read a letter that I wrote -- (Interjection) -- No, I don't want to read that last page.

March 21 , 1972 283 MR. SPEAKER: Order pleas e. The Honourable Member for Arthur on a matter of privilege. MR. WAT T: I would like to ask the member who is speaking now if he would like to give up his time for four minutes to the Minister of Agriculture so . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order, pleas e. That's not a matter or privilege. The Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre. MR. BOYCE: I'll have to rush this so, but I want it as a matter of record.

It was a public letter that I wrote with reference to my argument with the At torney-General, "It has been drawn to my attention that public st atements have been made attri but ing motives to my action relative to the reduction in the seating capacity of beverage rooms in the Main Street area. I would like to make my position quite clear. If any licensed operator of an established, or es tablishment licensed to sell alcoholic beverages is breaking the law, whether by selling alcohol to already intoxicated persons, or for any other act, the licence must be suspended.

If such practices are continued subs equent to suspension the licence should be revoked. What I do object to is what in my opinion is an abuse of statutory powers by an agency of government, whether it be against beverage room operators or anyone else within the constit uency of Winnipeg Centre. " Now, Mr. Speaker, this was an honest difference of opinion between the Att orney-General and myself.

He saw it one way, I saw it another way, and in my understand ing of things, called upon to do what I thought should be done in upholding the law, because it is my perso nal opinion that it isn't laws so much that separate us from the apes, it 's our re spect for the law. And here once again I have to side once again with the Member for Thompson that when he says there's a law on the books which is not being enforced relative to admissions to restricted movies, the law is there. And if we don't respect the law and enforce it then we're, in my opinion, heading for utter chaos .

Quite possi bly there'll be other opportunities to expand on this one point of the arbitrary use of decis ion-making powers and prerogatives and perhaps we can delve more fully into that at that time, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hour being 9: 30 according to our rule 33, subsect ion

(4) I am obliged to put the question to the Hous e. MR. SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPE AKER: The Honourable Firs t Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Finance, that an Address be engrosse d and presented to His Honour by su ch members of the House as are of the Executive Council, and the mover and seconder of the Addres s. MR. SPEAKER pres ented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. SAUL CHERNIACK, Q, C. (Minister of Finance)(St.

Johns): Mr. Speaker, I have a mess age from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor. MR. SPEAKER: The Lieutenant-Governor transmits to the Legislative Asse mbly of Manitoba Est imates of Sums required for the services of the province for the fiscal year end ing the 31st day of March, 1973 and recommends these Esti mates to the Legislative Asse mbly. The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHERNIA CK: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, se conded by the Honourable the Ministe r of Labour, that the said mes sage together with the Estimates accompanying the same be re ferred to the Committee of Supply . MR.

SPEAKER pres ented the motion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHE RNIACK: Mr. Speaker, as has been the practice in the past there are a few comments I would like to make in introducing these Estimates. The Est imates which I am pleased to bring before you and the ot her members of the House tonight require the appropria tion of a sum of $575, 849, 100 to ca rry out the necessary provision of provincial public service through programs which are consis tent with the government's primary objective the continuous promotion of the equality of the human condition.

Throughout our administration we have sought to refine and improve the budgetary process. In reviewing departmental es timates we have emphasized clear identifiication and definition of the needs of Manitobans, imaginative but pragmatic programming to meet those needs, and efficient, effective management control to assure maximum and equitable dis tribution of benefits to our citizens . It has been long, arduous work which required minute examination of detail but we've scrutinized every govern mental project and program. The result is an expenditure plan for fiscal 172 which

284 March 21, 1972 (MR. CHERNIACK cont•d ) . incorporates both high quality standards and sound financial management. It remains an overriding priority of this government to redis tribute inequitable burdens of taxation. Thus in large part to relieve property taxpayers, provincial finanCial responsi bility for financing public schools will be increased by $11,590, 200 to $118, 124, 700 in fiscal '72 - '7 3, representing a 10. 9 percent increase from fiscal '7 1.

Included in this total are amounts which represent a significant shift of close to $20 million in education costs from the municipal property tax base; Besides the increase in school grants which reflects the prov ince' s decision to underwrite a 75 percent share of the costs of the education Foundation Pro gram a major new program has been added for 1972 .

Although the fiscal 1972 expenditure estimates reflect a number of new and expanded programs, particularly within the dimensions human development, the government has exer cised considerable res traint in maintaining a large portion of existing services at an expendi ture level consistent with that previously effecti ve. The Department of Colleges and University Affairs will expand its successf ul student summer employment projects in 1972 to $2 million, an increase of $1. 3m illion or 18 5. 7 per cent from fiscal '7 1.

It is anticipated that this program will help to meet the job demands of the increased post secondary enrollments, hopefully with resulting reductions in the youth unemployment levels. Iri fiscal 1972 provincial student aid will also be raised to five million plus from two and a half million in fiscal 1971, an increase of approximately 100 percent. This program which supplements family and student resources in meeting educational costs where financial need is established is highly significant in terms of promoting greater accessi bility of post secondary education.

Child development services have been transferred from Health and Social Development to Education and expenditures on this very important program area have been raised from 595, 000 in fiscal 171 to 1, 230, 000, an increase of 635, 000 or 106. 7 percent. It is the inten tion of the government to provide a comprehensive clinical program patterned on the Child Guidance Clinic of Greater Winnipeg through the provincial office of Child Development Services to serve all children who have significant emotional, educational, physical and/or social handi caps or difficulties .

Es timated expenditures for income security programs in fiscal '7 2 will increase by 13, 772, 000 or some 23 percent from fiscal '7 1. The largest component of this expendi ture, which is cost shared with the Federal Government, is for social allowances reflecting greater reco gnition of need and participation which has in some cases been caused by the national un employment crisis. Tlie government' s continuing emphasis on northern development is evidenced by the es tablishment of the Northern Manpower Corps under the Department of Agriculture.

For fiscal 1972 this new program will have estimated expenditures of $691, 000 to assist native northerners in attaining first access to northern jobs. The provision for the Commissi oner of Northern Affairs will show an increase of 27 percent from fiscal '71. There will also be greater encouragement of northern co-o perative enterprises through the Department of Co-operative De velopment. This department' s expenditures will increase by 62 percent in the coming fiscal year.

The Department of Agriculture' s marketing expenditures show a substantial rise from 178, 000 in fiscal '7 1 to 28 6, 000 in fiscal '7 2, an increase of some 60 percent, and also a siz eable increase of 27 percent in expenditures for the provision of services to improve and expand the animal industry in the province. In total the Department of Agriculture's estimates are some 29 percent higher for the coming fiscal year than fiscal 171. It is noteworthy that departments have attempted to design programs which will add to our knowledge of social progress as well as assist in furthering it.

Two ready examples are the expansion of the Human Rights Commission in the Attorney-General' s Department and the establishment of a Women's Bureau in the Department of Labour. Well, there are several other program areas in which iiinovations are evidel\t but time

March 21, 1972 285 (MR. CHERNIACK cont' d) ..... does not permit an extensive examination of them all. Examples I have given illustrate bold new directions for the government which also encompass the compassion and concern for people that Manitobans have come to expect of us . Well, Mr. Speaker, I now commend these Estimates of Expenditure to the study of the Committee. I look forward to a fruitful 'and enlightened debate involving all parties .

I await with particular interest the contribution of the Honourable Leader of the Opposi tion, who I hope will be back with us soon, but who has already made statements in this regard and I q uote from a press statement which quotes him as saying: 111 obviously won' t reveal this now but I already have a complete list of the spending areas and amounts that can be cut from every government department, and I'll be presenting them in detail to the people during the campaign. " Well, Mr. Speaker, surely the Honourable Leader of the Opposition will not with hold such pertinent material until an election campaign.

Certainly he recognizes the responsi bilities he has to the people who elected him, both in his constituency a�d. as Leader of the Party in Opposition and cer tainly he will utilize this opportunity that he will have before him and indeed his obligation to present his information to this House. In fact I challenge him to do so. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. FROESE : I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Churchill, that debate be adjourned, MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable House Leader. MR. PAULLEY: I wonder, Mr.

Speaker, whether this is a proper motion of my honour able friend, It' s not a debate. What it is, is information transmitted by the Minister of Finance that the Estimates are going to be tabled and are ready to be tabled. I don' t think, Honourable Mr. Speaker, that this is a debatable motion, it' s merely the tabling of the Es timates of Expen diture for next year. Maybe you could take that consultation with the Clerk, but that is my impression. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland on the . . . MR. FROESE: Mr. Speaker, on that same point of order.

The Minister has just started the debate and I'm just going to continue it tomorrow . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR. PAULLEY: .•. the debate, it was the tabling of the Estimates of Expenditure for the Province of Manitoba, and he transmitted a message from His Honour the Lieu tenant Governor to this Hous e. That is all that has been done. MR.

SPEAKER: As I understand the procedure that has taken place until now is that the motion was to table the Supply Estimates and the permission which possibly may be my error for the honourable member which should have been unanimous for the Minister of Finance to make a statement in regards to the tabling. There was no debate indicated and as I say if I am remiss it is upon me that the blame should rest. But I am of the opinion that it is not a debat able motion. The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Speaking to the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

It strikes me that the Honourable the Member for Rhineland may be perhaps confusing two different motions . The motion that this House resolve itself into a Committee of Supply in order to consider the Estimates, that obviously is a debatable motion. However that motion is still here it has not yet been moved. --(I nterjection)-- It hasn't been made yet. That is right. And so perhaps the Honourable Member for Rhineland, I suggest, Sir, is anticipating by a few seconds.

What is before the House now, Sir, I submit is a mess age from His Honour that the Estimates be referred to Committee of Supply but that is hardly the kind of transaction which has been de batable. It's the motion to go into Supply, Sir, that• s debat able. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I rely on better experts in the House but I must have a feeling that I concur with the indication or the words just given to us by our First Minister.

I want to assure you that I was waiting for a motion that would resolve the House to go into Committee of the Whole to perhaps make a motion of my own or on behalf of my own party. I would rather suspect, Sir, that upon further deliberation by you that the position put forward by the First Minister is correct, that what we have up to date is a messa ge from His Honour and nothing more. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland.

286 March 21, 1972 MR. FROESE : A motion was made and duly seconded and the Minister of Finance has already debated that motion. Certainly this is a debatable motion and if it' s a debatable motion it can also be adjourned. · MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, perhaps just so it sh ould be more specific. Debatable mo tions are referred to under Rule 34.

They are all listed there and I ask my honourable friend io look at the list, 34, .· to all other motions including adjournment motions shall be decided without debate or amendment, and I would indicate that the motion that was made by the Minis ter of Flnance wa s, Mr .. Speaker, not included in 34 sub!;!ect ion (l) . I indicate that the Minister when he gi>t up said "as is the custom I would like to make some remarks" and I suggest that if my honourable friend thought that that was inappropriate he should have objected at the time that this is not a .debatable motion. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Just again to underline what the former House Leader had to say on this point. I cer tainly accepted the Minister of Finance' s remarks in the tradition that they were given as merely being an expansion of the messa ge from His Honour. MR . SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. FROESE: If that is your ruling then I would challenge your ruling. --(I nterjection)- MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. WARNER H. JORGENSON(Morris) : Mr. Speaker, I rise simply to draw to your attention another

section of Rule 34, that's 34 (

j) and it' s dealing with all debatable motions , and Pm not ' sure whether the Minister of Finance has made a motion to that effect as yet. My understand- ing is that he has not made that motion as yet and that a motion is to come and will be debatable and if that is the cas e why then perhaps we can clarify this matter for the Honourable Member for Rhineland. A debatable motion is one under subsec tion (

j) for reference to a committee of a report or annual return laid on the table of the House, and I expect that the Minister of Finance will be moving a motion formally tabling that report later, which it will be a debatable motion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I think the question before the House now is, Your Honour, that you have made a ruling; the Honourable Member for Rhineland has challenged that ruling, and according to the customs of this House that that challenge is valid if the Honourable Member for Rhineland has support.

If he has not the support then that challenge dies, and to me, Mr. Speaker, that is the position of conduct of the House that we• re in at the present time. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR . FROESE: On that same point of order that the House Leader made. When making a challenge you don't have to have support in order to put that motion. MR. SPEAKER: Shall the position of the Chair be sus tained? MR. SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR.

SPEAKER put the question on the motion of the Honourable Minister of Finance and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHERNIACK: Let's try again eh? Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Attorney-General, that this House will at its next sitting resolve itself into a Committee to consid.er of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MR. SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Riel, that debate be adjourned. MR.

SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture, that this House will at its next sitting resolve itself into a Committee to con sider of Ways and Means for raising of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MR. SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voic e vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, may I just for the information of honourable members mention the departments that it is expected we will be dealing with now that the motion referr ing to the Committee of Supply has been adjourned I would hope and expect that it will be passed

March 21, 1972 287 (MR, CHERNIACK cont'd) . tomorrow so that on Thursda y we can enter into the dealing of the Estimates of the House, In the normal practice we would not have proceeded with the Est imates tomorrow in any event in order to give honourable members an opport unity to pre pare. So that I am informed that the following is the proposed order of dealing with the various departments which if changed will of course be reported in advance.

The Attorney-Genera l's Department, Consumer Affairs, A griculture, Public Works, Labour, Civil Service, Highways and if we finish those by Friday then we'll have to get another list ahead of time. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR. PA ULLEY: I wonder now, Mr. Speaker, whether it may be proper for me to move the adjournment of the Hous e. The Clerk has copies of the es timates for individual members for every member of the House and I would suggest that they hold themselves around the Chamber until they are dist ributed. However, Mr.

Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Minister of Finance the House do now adjourn. MR. SPEAKER: I shall accept the motion of the Honourable Minister of Labour in one moment, I would just like to say to the Honourable Member for Lakeside and to the two House Leaders I have arranged to have the recording equipment in my chambers at 10:00 a. m. tomorrow morning. I should like to have them attend upon me in order to sat isfy the result s of the tape. MR. SPE AKER: Moved by the Honourable Minis ter of Labour . , . The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR. PAULLEY: I have no objections.

I obey your summons, let me put it that way, if it is a summons, but I have a very important Committee meeting tomorrow morning at ten o'clock, namely a meeting of the Cabinet, and I am under pressure to attend by my colleague the Firs t Minister, but I would have no objections at all for the suggestion you are making for the Honourable the Member for Lakeside to hear the recording in order that the record may be st raight. MR, SPEAKER: Well, let me say, if the Honourable Minister of Labour can have some one represent him I have no objection. MR.

PAULLEY: I therefore appoint my honourable friend, if he is available, the Honour able Minister for Inkster. MR . SPEAKER: Thank you. The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN ; Mr. Speaker, I note the proceedings that you have taken. I would like to try to have it understood that when the equipment was ins talled, it was installed on the under st anding that any member, and I am trying to recall it to you, Sir, that any member had a right to go to Hansard and ask to have a playback made of something which he thought may have been improperly recorded.

I have done so in the past, not in the Speakers' Chambers, or in the presence of the other party. I don't know whether you are us ing this particular procedure for this occasion, but I would hope that if that is the case, it does not mean that we no longer have the right to have Hansard play something back to us if we feel it has been improperly recorded. We have had that right up until now, and I would ask you, Sir, to permit us to have that continued right. MR. SPEAKER: I appreciate the Honourable Member for Inkste r's words.

There was no intention to bar anyone from hearing the tape, but there was an accusation, a charge made in the House, and for those reasons I wanted it to be witnessed by a number of people that be long to the House so that the charge, whichever way it goes, will then be clarified in the House. Moved by the Honourable Minister of Labour . . . The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR . PAULLEY: . , . my honourable friend, the Member for Inkster, says that he will not be able to be there tomorrow, I will arrange however, Sir, for somebody to be there in my st ead. MR.

SPEAKER pres ented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried and the House adjourned until 2:30 tomorrow, Wednesday.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	29-4-14
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	29th 4th hansardpdf 14.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	30bf72a1cc342a09c5b39f9f80178252e0450abc

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