Manitoba Hansard — 23 April 1985 (Sitting 33A, 32nd Legislature, 4th Session)

32-4-33a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 23 April, 1985. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Prese nting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports . Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills . INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. SPEAKER: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery. We have an alderman from the City of Regina, Mr. Stan Oxelgren.

There are 15 students of Grade 9 standing from the Vincent Massey High School. They are under the direction of Mr. Mclaug lin, Mr. Graham and Miss Shamray. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Brandon West. There are 25 students of Grade 5 standing from the Souris School under the direction of Mr. Wallmann and Miss Christiansen. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Arthur. On behalf of all of the members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS Evans Report - Medicare in Manitoba - police investigation MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: My question is for the Minister of Mun icipal Affairs. In view of the fact that a police investigation has now been conducted into the so-called leaked report on "Medicare in Manitoba - 1971 to the Present" and it has clearly ind icated that the report was leaked and not stolen, I wonder will the Minister of Muni cipal Affairs now withdraw his allegation and apolo gi ze to the Mem ber for Pem bina for the accusations he made. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. HON. A. ANSTETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not privy to any police report to date. I understand the Minister of Health has one; I will ask him to share it with me and review it. I understand from him, however, although I have not seen the report, that there is nothing in it whatsoever to confirm that this report was in any way leaked. I still stand by the statement I made two weeks ago, that the Member for Pembina was in possession of stolen property. I believed that to have been the case then; I still believe that to be the case. MR. G. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that the police clearly say that, at very most, it was a case of political espionage, that they believe that the report was not stolen; and in view of the fact that the Minister of Mu nicipal Affairs demande d that the polic e investigate, and their investigation has shown that it was not stolen, will he not have the courage to apologize to the Member for Pembina? MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. HON. A. ANSTETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe that it would be more appropriate for the Minister of Health to answer the question on the police report. But with respect to any question of an apology, Mr. Speaker, I think I should advise the Leader of the Opposition that I have some difficulty saying that theft is okay if it's for purposes of political espionage, but in all other cases, stealing is a criminal offence. Mr. Speaker, we have come to a serious impasse on the structure of democracy in this province if stealing for purposes of political espionage is now endorsed by members opposite. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please.

The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FllMON: Mr. Speaker, in case the Government House Leader has difficulty hearing, the police said it was not stolen - it was not stolen - and in view of the fact that this Minister doesn't have the courage to stand up and admit that he's wrong and to apologize for an obvious error, I ask the Premier, will he not turn to his Government House Leader and ask him to apologize because he's obviously in error. It's been investigated by the police and it's been thrown out. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please.

The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. L DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, at no time did the police say it wasn't stolen. The police said there's nothing further they could do. The police said that it could have been taken internally either by the staff of the building, cleaning staff or people that are visiting there could have taken the document. They said that they had no way of proving it unless we had a test on all the employees, which we weren't about to do. The situation is, the only accusation that was made was that the member had a stolen document.

The police said that it was the document in question; there was no doubt about that. They confirmed it. They had no idea where it went. Since then, on a numb er of occasions, people have tr ied to break in. The secretary was th ere - (Interjection) - Oh, you don't like that? The only thing that we've said is that it is a pretty sad day if you're 116 0

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 going to encourage this kind of thing, that everything is fair in love and war and politics and we don't subscribe to that. SQME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: I appeal to the Premier, in view of the fact that the police have clearly indicated that, in their view, they have no evidence that it was stolen. They've investigated; they received the report; my colleague from Pembina co-operated; gave them the report. Have your Minister apologize. I ask the Premier, have your Minister apologize.

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. If members can restrain their enthusiasm, perhaps we can proceed with question period. The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'm looking forward to looking at the police report that reference has been made to by the Leader of the Opposition. We hear it said, just as there was by the Member for Pembina a week ago, it was first slipped under the door; secondly, it mysteriously appeared on his desk and, thirdly, it appeared through channels.

I think the Honourable Member for Pembina has some explanation to make to this House. Mr. Speaker, we've heard a few moments ago from the Leader of the Opposition that it clearly indicated that it was theft. I've heard from the Minister of Health, who has had privy to the report, that there is no such statement within the police report. Mr. Speaker, I will look forward to looking at that report. Mr. Speaker, I am saddened by a comment made in this House but a few moments ago that political espionage, which involves a deli berate planned effort to obtain leaked documents, is fine and dandy.

I have never before heard a statement in any Parliament or any Legislature that deliberate political espionage is honourable. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, the Premier obviously has difficulty hearing and persists in trying to twist the truth. - (Interjection) Absolutely not. I said that we have nothing to do with it, it was a leaked document SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please.

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. May I remind all honourable members that question period is a time for gathering information and not for making argum ents nor for asking or for making repetitive representations. If the Honourable Leader of the Opposition has a question seeking information, would he pose it? The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the Premier is, will he stop attempting to foster doubt and deal in innuendo, and instead deal with the matter at hand, investigate the report and have the Min ister apologize for an obvious untruth? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The question is clearly out of order. Would the honourable mem ber wish to ask a question to seek information and not to make an argument? Manitoba Economic Conference - government input MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. 11 61 SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Industry and Technology. I would ask the Minister of Industry and Technology if the Provincial Government has any financial input to the Manitoba Economic Conference which is being sponsored by the Canadian Trend Report? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, the Government of Manitoba is involved with Canadian Trend and a num ber of other public and private institutions in the formation of that conference. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Speaker, could I ask the same Minister, because they have put financial support behind this conference, I would ask him how much money, and also, did they have anything to do with the structuring of the program and the brochure that was presented to the people? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In terms of any potential cost to the province, I believe it will be little if any.

It depends on the amount of participants that pay the registration fee and we're expecting that there'll be little if any cost to the province which respect to the cost of the conference in terms of the people that are participating and the agenda

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 that was done in co-oper ation with the various participants. MR. f. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, the agenda that's put out has a heading, "The Decade Ahead" and part way down it says "Exciting developments to take place in the economy of Manitoba include . . . "One of those inclusions is the construction of the National Interest Institute of Manufacturing and Technology, which it is expected to attract some three million people to private investments and private services to industry across the nation. Is the government now confirming that this institute will be in Manitoba? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No, I can't confirm that that institute will be in the Province of Manitoba. What I can confirm is that we have been working and having ongoing discussions with the Federal Government trying to convince them that they ought to live up to the mandate to have that centre here in the Province of Manitoba under the same kind of mandate that the member opposite worked on for a numb er of years in terms of having that national centre for manufacturing and technology located here in the Province of Manitoba.

We are continuing those discussions and I would that the Federal Government will, indeed, confirm in the near future that that centre will be here in the Province of Manitoba. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minister that by sending out all of these brochures inviting the people to attend this conference, does he not regard it as misleading to put what appears to be a fact in this brochure and the Minister now tells the House that he's not positive? HON. E. KOSTYRA: I tried to find what the question was in that statement, Mr. Speaker.

The purpose of this conference is to work with people in the private sector to look at opportunities that may be available in the Province of Manitoba with respect to the increased economic activity that's taking place in the province through the Limestone Development, through other developments in the province, to ensure that we can get maximum participation by the private sector and maximum benefits to the people of the province by virtue of the major activities that are taking place in our province. Charter of Rights - court challenges MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Attorney -General. Could the Attorney-General ind icate what, if there is any, process exists at Legal Aid in order to preclear or authorize or disapprove arguments that might be made in court challenging certain actions on the basis of challenges under The Charter of Rights Act? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: I thank the member for th at question. Actually, there is an issue there that arose recently with the finding by a judge of the Court of Queen's Bench that certain sections of The Highway Traffic Act were invalid because of the Charter.

I believe it's

Section 97 of our Queen's Bench Act, indeed, requires that when constitutional validity is raised as an issue that the Attorney-General be advised. This was not the case in that instance. I'm advising the Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of the duty that falls under the act to advise the Attorney-General and the Attorney General of Canada so that representations may be made when constitutional validity is raised.

Additio nally, in order to make that point abundantly clear and that that situation has not changed because of the Charter, which is after all a cons titutional instrument, I am considering recommending a statutory amendment similar to the one recently passed in Saskatchewan and Al berta, which would req uire specifically that when any Charter issue is raised advance notice be given by the presiding judge or by the chief judge or by the senior associate chief judge to the Attorney-General so that representations might be made. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the Attorney-General was not related in any way to the answer. Perhaps I was unclear. I was concerned with challenges in court based on the Charter of Rights, which are funded by the taxpayer through Legal Aid. My question relates specifically to the challenge by Mr. Prober with respect to the jury question that he suggests six Natives should be on every jury, with respect to his Native client. I'm asking the Attorney-General what process there is in Legal Aid to approve or disapprove such absurd challenges to laws based on the Charter of Rights? MR. SPEAKER: Orde r pl ease.

I would ask both members to restrict questions and answers to the matters dealing with Legal Aid and not to impinge on a matter which might be before the courts at the moment. The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Thank you very much for that advice, Mr. Speaker, and I certainly agree with the point that you're making. Therefore, I won't comment as to whether or not the particular issue is or is not absurd. I have no way of knowing that, of course. That is for a judge to decide and, ultimately, an appellate judge.

It would, in my view, be a serious perversion of the Legal Aid system, in deed turn it into a political instrument, if Legal Aid certificates being warranted, on the basis of the statute and the financial eligibility criteria, Legal Aid was then to tell lawyers in private practice how they should represent their clients. I can't imagine a more horrendous suggestion than that. This clearly would be a perversion of the independence both of the bar and of the bench, in suggesting of that kind of political Legal Aid system. I would in no way accept such a suggestion. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that Legal Aid, certainly in the past in many instances, 11 62

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 required lawyers to submit legal opinions for review on the validity of an issue which they wished to raise in court; in view of the fact that there are almost limitless challenges which lawyers may make under the Charter of Rights, only a small minority of which may be reasonable, to be funded by the taxpayer; in view of the funding difficulties Legal Aid is having at the present time, would the Attorney-General not consider some method of pre-clearing or authorizing or improving the types of arguments that could and will be made in court and protect the taxpayer in some small way? HON.

R. PENNER: I believe that the taxpayer is very well protected by the Legal Aid system that we have in force in the Province of Manitoba. With respect to certificates which are requested for appeals, in certain circumstances because appeal certificates are a matter of discretion, lawyers requesting an appeal certificate to the Supreme Court are required to get an opinion from outside the system, that is, from another lawyer or lawyers in the private bar as to the merits in those particular instances.

But with respect to the primary certificates which are given as a matter of right, if the statutory conditions and the financial eligibility criteria are met, then it would not be proper to attempt to fix conditions or to screen the application because, Mr. Speaker, that would then turn the Legal Aid Board into the court of first instance. It would have to judge, by argument, pro and con, as to whether or not the proposed defence is a valid defence, is a tenable defence, and that is just an imp ossibl e system . I can 't belie ve tha t a former Attorney-General would even suggest such a process.

Community Services, Thompson - decision delay re children MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Community Services. Can the Minister tell this House why a 19-month delay occurred by Community Services of Thompson regarding a decision related to a 10-year-old and a 12 -year-old child. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services. HON. M. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I asked the region in Thompson to review the situation and let me know why such had occurred and what action should be taken to deal with it They have met, Mr.

Speaker, with the Awasis Agency and, again, this case spanned prior to when the agency was mandated and after. There was some confusion and delay associated with that. Our main concern is that the procedures we have in place which we think are designed to prevent this are, in fact, applied. In terms of the longer-term management in such cases, the department has comple ted a needs assessment which will develop a service information system.

We're looking at the best way to operationalize that via computer that will be central and will enable us to track and monitor cases to see that they do follow the time frame and meet the standards required by the legislation. MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The judge who heard the case was very disturbed about the disregard Community Services displayed and, in his opinion, they did not work in the best interests of the children. Will the Minister make certain after her investigation and give us the assurance that this type of situation is not going to occur again? HON. M. SMITH: Mr.

Speaker, I think I've answered the main question there. There is some responsibility resting with the courts who have on occasion adjourned hearings and thereby contributed to the delay. I think it's a shared responsibility, but I'll certainly do everything on our department's part to ensure that we do, in fact, process these cases as speedily as we possibly can. HERizons Magazine - Archbishop Exner's opposition to MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for E!mwood. MR. R. DOERN: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the First Minister and ask him whether he can confirm that he has received a letter from Archbishop Exner with copies to the Honourable Minister of Cultural Affairs and the Minister of Education expressing his opposition and concern about the magazine HE Rizons? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I have not seen such a letter, but I'll accept the question as notice. HERizons Magazine - Advertising in MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I'd also like to ask the Minister of Labour, given the fact that the St.

James School Board has voted against allowing HE Rizons Magazine in their division, and given the fact that many citizens have expressed concern about this publication, is the Minister reviewing his department's policy of advertising in this publication? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. Order please. HON. A. l\ll ACKUNG: Mr. Speaker, I'm not aware of the extent, if any, of advertising by my department, but I assume that such advertising is handled in a routine manner. I certainly haven't looked at it.

To comment about what the school board has done in respect to that matter is out of my jurisdiction. HERlzons Magazine - Referred to Ed ucation Manitoba MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, a final question. I'd like to ask the Minister of Cultural Affairs, given that his deskmate, the Minister of Education, stated that his 11 63

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 department erred in suggesting that HERizons Magazine was looked at, examined, classified by her department as suitable for junior or senior high students, were these publ ications, in fact, referred to the Department of Education or was this a fabrication? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I bel ieve I've already answered that question, but I'm pleased to answer it again. I did indicate that the suggestion or the

interpretation of the letter that went out from staff to school divisions with respect to the impli cation that those publications were approved was incorrect. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that I also apologized to the House and to the school divisions that that took place and it that it shouldn't have taken place and there was no suggestion that those pub lications were approved.

What was the case, that they were a list publications that were available to the school divisions through school libraries and also public libraries, if they so chose, and if they did, that there would be a subsidy provided for the costs of subscription. This is part of a larger program, Mr. Speaker, a Federal-Provincial Agreement on cultural industries and cultural enterprises in the province and this is one portion of a program.

The overall portion is a book and periodicals program, and I might add, for the member opposite's information, that the one book that he wrote and had publ ished is under that program also; and indeed, some school divisions may have even bought some copies of his book under that program. MACC - renting of properties MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture. The Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation has a number of properties that they've offered for lease to the farm commun ity by tender.

Will the Minister of Agriculture provide us in this Assembly with all the tenders that have been put forward for the lease of those properties? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'll take the question as notice, but I would think the discussion on the whole matter of Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation and their properties could best be handled in our Estimates when they come up before the House. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Speaker, I've been rece1v1ng numerous calls where farmers have made application or have tendered for properties, and they are of the opinion that they are the highest tender and they're not being received. Will the Minister of Agriculture tell the public what his policy is? Is it his policy to accept the highest tender on those lease properties or someone else that he decides should have that properties, other than the highest tenders? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr.

Speaker, there are instances where I believe the corporation has had loans where th ere has been a qu itclaim and there's been a rescheduling and resettlement of debts where the corporation may entertain a lease with the previous owner of the properties; but I'll take the specifics as notice. Each case is viewed by the corporation on its own merits, in terms of who has bid. In most cases, where properties have in fact been turned over to the corporation, some time ago and there's been no recent relationship with the previous owner on that property, those would, I believe, go to the highest bidder. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, a final quick question. Several days ago I asked a series of questions which his colleague, the Minister of Housing, took as notice. I am anxious to receive the answers. I wonder if the Minister of Agriculture could provide the answers to the questions that I've asked. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr.

Sp eaker, I've asked the corporation to outline, as precisely as possible, the procedures that they have used in terms of the tenders, but with respect to providing the names of all the tenderers, I don't believe that's been a corporation policy; but I've asked them to review that so that, in fact, that information could be available when our Estimates come before comm ittee. Interest Rate Relief Program - billing and collecting repayable portion MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Development Corporation. During the debate on Sup plementar y Supp ly, it was ind icated th at Manitoba Development Corporation will be undertaking the billing and collection of the repayable portion of the Interest Rate Relief Program funding to farmers, businessmen and homeowners. My question to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Development Corporation is, how many notices have been sent out for the collection of the repayable portion of that interest rate relief assistance? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll take that question as notice and provide the information once I have it. Dip-netting - closing of season MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, the other day the Member for La Verendrye asked a question with respect to dip-netting in the Whiteshell. The answer is that, because of the limited number of pickerel in that whole area, it was decided not to permit dip-netting this season, in that pickerel were being caught along with the other species. 11 64

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is the Minister saying that it was a control problem ar'ld really that there is a lack of staff to enforce the current requirements which require you to throw any pickerel or jack back when you're dip-netting mull ets? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, the member assumes that there is an over-abundance of staffing to police all of the fishing sites in the Whiteshell. I can assure him that there never has been and likely never will be. MR. R. BANMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the Minister could tell us then if the department has advised him that there has been over-fishing in the Whiteshell of walleye. HON. S. USKIW: I'm not sure that I got the gist of that question, Mr. Speaker. MR. R. BANMAN: Mr. Speaker, the Minister, in replying to my question, said that the quantities of pickerel were down in the Whiteshell. Is that due to over-fishing or is there another problem? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure why we have a problem with respect to the numb ers of pickerel in the Whiteshell area.

I suspect that information could be made available in the course of our Estimates discussion this afternoon; but the message is that we want to protect that species because that indeed is the species that the sports fishermen, the anglers like to go after during the course of the seaso n. Indiscriminate dip netting at this time of the year would reduce that opportunity for our summer fishermen. Manfor layoff - Impact on Moose lake loggers MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Swan River. MR. D. GOURLAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs.

In view of the impending shutdown of Manfor at The Pas, what implications will this have, if any, on the contractors and/or loggers associated with Moose Lake Loggers? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Both the corporation - Moose Lake Loggers will also be laid off for a three-month period because of the shutdown at Manfor. Annual Reports, Crown corps. Tabling of MR. D. GOURLAY: A further question to the same Minister.

I wonder when the Minister will be able to table the Annual Reports for Moose Lake Loggers and Channel Area Loggers, as well as the Communi ties Economic Development Fund. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Speaker, the annual reports of those three corporations will be ready approximately April 30th. Flood Assist ance Program - Bellsite-Birch River area MR. D. GOURLAY: I direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture and ask the Minister if he has made any decision to extend the flood disaster area in the Birch River-Lenswood commun ities? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mini ster of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr.

Speaker, we did - in fact the Premier requested the Min ister of Agricultur e for Canada to reconsider their commitment to extend the boundaries, not only of the Birch River-Lenswood, but all of the areas in Manitoba that were designated as being eligible to receive some flood compensation because there were requests from producers in those areas to extend the boundaries from all areas. That request was submitted formally to the Minister of Agriculture through my offices following the meeting with the Minister of Agriculture.

We have just received the response and they are not prepared to consider any extension of the boundaries. MR. D. GOURLAY: I wonder if the Min ister of Agriculture could clarify whose responsibility was it to designate the disaster areas in the first place. Was it the Federal Government or the province? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr.

Speaker, the original program, as the honourable member will app reciate, we attempted for a year and a half to provide assistance to those areas that were severely flooded over the last num ber of years and there was no concurrence from the Federal Government until we were advised that there was consideration being given by the Federal Government to provide assistance for northeastern Saskatchewan in June or July of 1984.

At that point in time, Sir, we telexed the Federal Government of the day asking them if they were prepared now to provide assistance for areas within the Province of Manitoba since they were considering areas in our neighbouring Province of Saskatchewan. Since that time, Sir, we did finally get an agreement signed between Manitoba and Ottawa. The actual boundaries initially were established in consultation with the municipal councils and our staff and negotiated with the Federal Government. Grand Valley Park, Brandon - Construction of water slide 11 65 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources.

HON. S. USKIW: Yes, Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Leader 'Jf t�e Opposition asked a question with respect

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 to Grand Valley water slide or Grand Valley Park as to whether or not we had consulted with archeologists. I would like to advise him that discussions were carried on with the staff of the Department of Cultural Affairs and Hi storical Resou rces, but not dir ect ly with archeologists. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, before I move a motion for the House to resolve itself into Committee of Supply, I had discussed with the Opposition House Leader the Estimates order and I wish to advise the House of the next two departments, both in the House and in comm ittee. We have announced that following Health and Urban Affairs in the House

section of the Committee of Supply will be Finance, Agriculture, and Education. I announced today that following Education will be Community Services and then Crown Investments. We're currently considering Natural Resources in the committee room, Sir. Following Natural Resources in the committee room will be Muni cipal Affairs and then, Sir, after Municipal Affairs, the Department of the Attorney-General and Consumer and Corporate Affairs, and following that, Business Development and Tourism. So, that's the ord er, Sir, to date for both the committee and the House.

We have maintained some flexibility, Sir, depending on the time it takes for any particular department to modify that list if necessary to accommoda te critics and Ministers. In addition, Sir, I wish to advise that the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources which did not complete its deli berations this morning on the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Report will meet again this Thursday at 10:00 a.m. to continue those deliberations.

If they finish that report at that time, Sir, I would anticipate that we would consider the Report of the Manitoba Telephone System starting next Tuesday in the same committee. I will confirm that, Sir, after Thur sday's commit tee meet ing and after consultation with the Opposition House Leader. Sir, if there are no questions on those items with regard to Business and if I have leave to request that we dispense with Private Members' Hour today, I would ask for that leave. If it's granted, I would then move us into Supply. MR. SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? Leave has not been granted. HON. A.

ANSTETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee of Supply to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOTION presented. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MATTER OF GRIEVANCE MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Memb er for Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak on a grievance.

I wish to express my disappointment in the length of time that it has taken this government to commit themselves to the support required to ensure that the sugar beet industry will survive in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, yesterday during question period the First Minister said that this was a responsibility of the Federal Government and to a large extent it has been the responsibility of the Federal Government.

However, we are under different circumstances at the present time, where we are having a great amount of subsidized sugar entering Manitoba from the United States, subsidized by the United States, and we are in a different position than we have ever been before. Mr. Speak er, it is necessary for all levels of government to work together in order to resolve this situation. There is no time anymore to try to figure out who is responsible. We must all work together to resolve this situation. Mr.

Speaker, it is urgent that the support come forward immediately if we are to preserve the 100-plus full-time and the 150-plus part-time jobs at the factory in Fort Garry plus the hundreds of full-time and part time jobs provided by their producers. Mr. Speaker, I was just handed a petition signed by all the workers at the plant in Fort Garry requesting that this government .take action immediately in order to preserve their jobs.

I appreciate the support the Provincial Government is giving to the producers in trying to attain a national sugar policy for Canada so that this annual problem of sugar price can be resolved once and for all. This national sugar policy, hopefully, will provide a stable sugar price for Canada, avoid the wide fluctuations in price that we now experience and give the industry protection against the dumping of surplus sugar on our market - surplus sugar that is subsidized by the United States for export purposes. Mr.

Speaker, 85 percent of sugar is traded on the world market; 15 percent of world sugar production, at the present time, has no place to go because of a surplus. The 85 percent is trading at a world price of around 20 cents per pound. All major countries trade in the 85 percent market of world sugar produced. Canada is the only major country without a sugar policy trading in the 15 percent surplus sugar. This is why we have the widely fluctuating sugar prices in Canada. When there is a world surplus of sugar, we have low prices.

When sugar is scarce, we have to pay outrageously high prices because we have not protected ourselves by making long-term sugar contracts at world price. When the price of sugar is up, there is justification for price increases and we see this continuo usly. Every time the price of sugar increases, the price of soft drinks, the price of cake mixes, the price of candy bars, everything that contains sugar goes up and there is justification for this at that time. The prices, when they do go up, go up very high. As a matter of fact, in 19 75 and in 1980, because there was a low supply of sugar and because there 11 66

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 was no surplus sugar around, the price went as high as 80 cents a pound. Now, that is a far cry from the world trading price of sugar which traditionally has been running anywhere between 16 and 23 cents a pound. The thing about this is that when the price again comes down to the 15 cent level where we are at the present time, the price of the bars, cake mixes and everything else, don't ever come down again.

The consumer is still, right now, in spite of the fact that we have now for four years had extremely low prices, the consumer is still paying the high level price for one-half the sugar he/she requires because one half the intake of sugar per person is purchased through cake mixes, soft drinks and other products which you purchase that contain sugar. The Federal Government previously had a stabilization formula covering sugar beets when prices were low. This was necessary because Canada does not purchase sugar through the world market.

The 85 percent of the sugar I mentioned earlier, the stabilization price had to be negotiated every year to determine the level of support, if any. When the sugar price was high, there was no support, of course. Canada has never had a stable sugar price. We have either unreasonably low prices or outrageously high prices. This policy has not affected the sugar cane processors because they put their margin of profit on sugar process at regardless the price. The sugar beet producers in Canada, however, have not been able to compete when prices are extremely low.

Surplus sugar sel ls for pric es that bear no relationship to the cost of production. All the sugar in the European Common Market is produced from sugar beets. Brazil, Poland and Russia produce sugar from sugar beets. This sugar, to a large extent, determines the price on the world market and the Canadian sugar beet producer can compete very well with that price received by the sugar beet producers in other countries. All these reasons, Mr. Speaker, make it essential that Canada have its own sugar policy and no longer be the dumping ground for surplus sugar at a time when there is a surplus. Mr.

Speaker, the urgency of an immed iate decision by this government is that the sugar beets are difficult to grow and land conditions, in most cases, are right, right now. In some cases, we have already waited too long and the moisture level is such that it's lower and you will have await a rain before you'll be able to plant the sugar beets. But if the decision is made right now, then we can possibly start planting, providing that we can reach agreement with Manitoba Sugar. This has to be done first.

Alberta is negotiating with them right now, and hopefully we can reach agreement with Manitoba Sugar so that we can start planting no later than the end of this week. Much research has been done in the production of sugar beets, Mr. Speaker. When we first started off with sugar beets, we had a multi- germ plant and probably from one seed you would get about 10 seedlings and these all had to be separated and it took an awful lot of hand labour. Now we have a mono germ seed and you only get one plant per seed which is a tremendous im provement over what we had previously.

Herbicides have also been improved so that we can now control weeds in the sugar beet industry, but there's a tremendously high cost involved in the growing of sugar beets because these chemicals and the seed is running at $20 a lb. It's tremendously expensive to produce an acre of sugar beets; and because of the high cost of fertilizer and the availability of labour at the present time, many growers are turning back to labour and providing much needed work for many people who are very dependent upon the sugar beet industry.

I've had many people coming forward who have small holdings of land, who have a large garden, a couple of cows, a couple of chickens, a couple of hogs and they are self-sufficient in every respect except that they have absolutely no cash income and the cash income that they are looking forward to is the income that they get from working in sugar beets. Some families will, over a period of about four weeks or so, earn up to $5,000 working in this particular industry. Mr.

Speaker, if they do not have that type of industry, if they do not have that income from the sugar beets, then they will have to be put on the payroll of the government and the welfare. Mr. Speaker, any subsidy and stabilization required by the grower, came from the Federal Government and the Federal Government is attempting to go out of stabilization programs and this has created a problem for the sugar beet industry. A new twist to the production of sugar in Canada has developed because of the ridiculously low-priced subsidized sugar which is being imported into Canada from the United States.

This American sugar has made it impossible for even the company to remain com petitive in price and assurance is needed that action will be taken by governments for remedying this particular situation immediately because the sugar beet industry cannot flourish in Manitoba under the present situation. The Alberta Government has offered to help the Federal Government by offering a guarantee of up to $10 per tonne of sugar beets. Similar action must be forthcoming immediately from the Manitoba Provincial Government. Mr.

Speaker, there is no time left to enter into long discussions with the Federal Government as to whose responsibility it is to preserve this industry. A decision has to be made now. Hopefully, a long-term solution to the problem can be found by October and none of the money allocated toward a guarantee will be needed. We sincerely hope that this gov ernment will help the prod ucers in persuading the Federal Government to adopt a sugar policy in Canada. Meanwhile, a decision has to be made and I trust that the NDP Government of Manitoba will do all they can to preserve this important industry in Canada. MR.

SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the honourable member for allowing me at least some time. As he's well aware, we're meeting with the sugar beet producers very shortly, along with the Premier, to dis cuss this situation. Mr. Speaker, I guess the question really has to be in this House, whose side are the Conservatives on? Are they on the side of the farmers? Are they on the 11 67

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 side of the company? Are they on the side of the Federal Government? Clearly, that party is letting the farmers hang. They are allowing the workers and the farmers of th is provinc e dangle out ther e by their very nonsensical position on this issue. If it was a Liberal Government in Ottawa, you'd have heard screams in this House saying, help the producers. Why is the Federal Government reneging on their long -standing comm itm ent to the farmers of this province? Mr. Speaker, that's what you'd have heard. Now we have a new era of federal-provincial relations.

The Federal Government is calling on the provinces to bail them out. For 40 years the Government of Canada had a policy of saying that we shall have a domestic sugar beet indus try. Mr. Speaker, from the years in which The Agricultur al Stabilization Act was passed, in 19 58-1 970, out of tho se years, 12 years, The Agricultu ral Stabilization Act paid support to Manitoba sugar beet producers. In 1985 , Mr. Speaker, there's been a change in federal policy. They no longer consider the sugar beet industry in this country as a vital industry. That's really what the position of the Federal Government is. Mr.

Speaker, they did not have to put any money on the table to assist sugar beet producers, Sir. All they had to tell sugar beet producers in this country was that The Agricultural Stabil ization Act shall apply. There was no need to make any annou ncement that money had to be put on the table, Mr. Speaker, why they did that, becaus e the y were reneg ing on their long -term commitment to the sugar industry. We don't know, Sir, even tod ay, even if the province con sidered putting up this financial support, whether or not the sugar beet industry will continue beyond next year.

Even the producer groups, Sir, have said it is no sense putting in money on a short-term basis because if we don't know that there's a long-term commitment, it is not going to do us any good. Mr. Speaker, this problem has been dumped on the Province of Manitoba. The Federal Government knew in November of 1984, Sir, that there was a problem. Ho w long did it take them to act ? Mr. Speak er, November, December Jan uary, February, March, till the middle of April, 5 months it took them to make up their mind what th ey're going to do and they led the producers of this province down the road.

They don't care about the West, Mr. Speaker. They really have written off the West, Mr. Speaker. They've written off the sugar beet industry. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speak er, the Honourable Mem ber for Rhineland said that it's taken a long time for the Province of Manitoba to commit itself to support. Mr. Speaker, where has he been?

In fact, he was in my office at around 11 :00 o'clock last - what was it? - Thursday night when we first knew of the federal proposal, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, those words of the Member for Rhineland are very shallow in terms of the sugar beet industry, very shallow indeed. What they don't want to admit is that their own colleagues federally have sold them down the drain. That's what they don't want to admit. Mr. Speaker, the Member for Fort Garry rose in his place yesterday and said, will you provide the sugar beet industry with some loans to carry them through. Mr.

Speaker, if he's speaking on behalf of the sugar beet industry, we'll certainly, and I'm sure my colleague, the Minister of Indus tr y, Trade and Comme rce, will look at th at question. But Mr. Speaker, that's not what's on the table. Right now, the sugar beet growers don't have a contract. They don't have a contract and they don't know and we don't know. We will find out. The Premier is asking the sugar beet company to place their cards on the table because even if we decided, Sir, to put financial support to the producers, we don't know what the company will do.

Will they, in fact, reverse the contract that they wanted to reverse and they put it to the Federal Government saying we want to reverse the terms of the contract, put the producers even further behind on this issue in terms of their financial position? We don't even know, Sir, that even if we put this money on the table the company will still say it's not enough. What do we have from the honourable members saying it's not enough, you've got to get some more support. Mr.

Speaker, we proposed several alternatives to the Federal Government in which way they could put the sugar beet ind ustry and the producers of Manitoba, Quebec and Alberta on a more equal footing with their company, Sir. It would not cost the taxpayers of this province one penny, not one penny if they followed our solution. Sir, they would not give us a commitment that they were, in fact, prepared to put into place a long term sugar policy in this country. Obviously, Sir, if they're not prepared to do that, what are they really saying to the sugar beet producers of Manitoba? You're going down the drain.

We're not about to stick with you, Mr. Speaker. - (Interjection) - Oh, what are you saying to me? The honourable members, no. They wouldn't support us on equalization payments, Mr. Speaker. They wouldn't support us on the research centre, Mr. Speaker. They wouldn't support us with Gimli and in Churchill, and now they're saying what are you going to do? Bail out our friends in the Federal Government. Make them look good in terms of their deficit. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain on a point of order. MR. B. RANSOM: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I'm sure that the Honourable Minister of Agriculture wouldn't want to have left the impression that members on this side did no t assist the govern ment in ge ttin g additional equalization payments. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, it's very clear that it took the Minister of Finance a lot of pulling and dragging 11 68

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 to get the members onside on this question. In fact, their leader accused this government of playing politics on that very issue but it took our Minister of Finance some finessing to embarrass you to come onside. That's what it really took to get you onside, Mr. Speaker, and we're still short $22 million on that issue as well. It doesn't bother them, Mr. Speaker. I don't know whether it does. I hope it does as Manitobans, but for the Conservative opposition in this House to get up and say we in Manitoba should bail the Federal Government out after 40 years of a federal policy, Mr.

Speaker, I find that shameful that they would allow Manitobans to be whipsawed by their colleagues in Ottawa. That's what I find very shameful by the conduct of the honourable mem bers op posite. Espe cially the Honourable Member for Rhineland, when his own producers, his own constituents said, what we need is a long-term commitment to this industry. That's what they need. Mr. Speaker, we are standing behind the producers of this province. Mr. Speaker, without that long-term commitment from the Federal Government there is really no sense continuing on as the president of the sugar beet producers said.

If we don't have a long term commitment, what is the sense of continuing on beyond this year. Even the Honourable Member for Rhineland knows that's been the case. Why doesn't he get up in this House and answer us and tell us on behalf of his colleagues in Ottawa. All they had to do was say The Agricultural Stabil ization Act will be in place for the producers of this country and it's done. No, Mr. Speaker, no, they wouldn't do that They said we'll only put up $8 million and it's up to you guys to bail us out. That's really the tack that they've taken after 40 years of support for the sugar industry, Sir. Mr.

Speaker, did I hear the Honourable Member for Stu rgeon Creek correctly? Didn't meet with the growers? Mr. Speaker, I met with the growers long before this problem was raised in this House, months. They knew in November that there was a problem. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek should really wake up to the nonsense that his federal colleagues are pulling on the Province of Manitoba and the Province of Quebec in this country. The Province of Alberta bailed out the Federal Government. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, I will put on the record, when I raised this question last November - I want it on the record - in Regina when we were signing the drought agreement about the problems that we foresaw in the sugar beet industry. The Minister of Agriculture from Alberta indicated to us, to the Federal Minister and myself that we should hang tough because the company is going to try and whipsaw the producers against the Federal Government and provinces. Mr. Speaker, he said we had to stand together in this issue and fight the company so that producers would get a fair deal. Mr. Speaker, who was the first to break ranks?

It was the Government of Alberta. Now is it because they've got a sweetheart deal in terms of the energy agreement? Is that the reason that they are prepared to put money out front to their producers after they got the sweetheart deal on the energy agreement, Mr. Speaker? Obviously, they're in a much better position to put money forward than we were. We couldn't compete against them when it came to the canola industry, Mr. Speaker. Did we hear honourable members say anything about the canola ind ustry in Saskatchewan, in Mani toba when the industry had to shut down? No.

We heard very little from the honourable members. - (Interjection) - We heard very little from honourable members on that issue. The canola industry - (Interjection) - Mr. Speaker, we have, in fact, asked the Federal Government for a commitment to the sugar beet industry in this country. It is a reneging of their long-term policy, clearly, and we stand by that Until there is a commitment of the Federal Government that there will be a sugar beet policy by October - and I heard the honourable member saying, well, there should be one by October - I hope. Mr.

Speaker, I spoke to the Minister responsible for the Wheat Board on Friday and I asked him to confirm in writing that there would be a policy. Sir, he would not. He would not commit himself that there would be a policy in place by October. We gave them two options, Sir. If they're worried about the GATT agreement, in order to place a levy on the sugar cane coming in for processing into this count ry, placing a levy to protect their own industry, that could be done. They said they were worried about that. We said there is another alternative, if you want an alternative.

You could place an excise tax on all the sugar that is consumed in this country domestically. You don't have to deal with what's coming in from outside, Sir. If they pl aced that excise tax on do mestic consumption, it would place the producers and the company on much more equal footing because there would be no advantage on behalf of the company to take more income from the producers, as they have proposed, but the Federal Government has refused to get involved, to really tell the company what the rules of the game are. They're saying, it's your baby; we don't want to get involved. Mr.

Speaker, that is a second reneging of the responsibility to the producers of this country because they refuse to tell the companies that they're prepared to commit themselves to a sugar policy and prepared to put the producers of this country on a much more equitable footing between them and their companies, because ther e would be no greater advantage for tho se companie s to whi psaw the producers ... A MEMBER: Cancel your advertising and give the sugar beet . .. HON. B. URUSKI: Oh, Mr.

Speaker, the honourable members, all they are, are really mouths of the Federal Government, wanting the Federal Government to be bailed out by the provinces. That's really what they are trying to do and they are leading their own constituents down the garden path on this whole issue. MR. SPEAKER: Has the hono ura ble member completed his remarks? HON. B. URUSKI: Yes. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I listened with great interest to the position being enunciated by the 11 69

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 Minister and it's one of no policy for the people of Manitoba. Before he leaves the Chamber, maybe he'd like to hear some comments about the Member for Fort Garry who has a concern about a vital industry in the City of Winnip eg. You wanted to know where our party stood on the position of this issue. Well, we stand for all Manitobans, Mr. Speaker, on this issue, because this is a large industry and employs a fair numb er of people within this province. If this industry dies this year, all the farmers will be out of luck; but the people in Winnip eg will be out of luck as well.

There will be no work for the truck drivers to haul the sugar beets to market; there will be no work for the mechanics to repair the trucks; there will be no additional employment created in the plant. None of those will be taking place this year if the industry is allowed to die. The intriguing thing is that the Minister said, "I brought this problem to the attention of the Federal Government last year and nothing was done." I listened to the Minister; I listened to the First Minister yesterday and they say, we told you about it - but what had they done in the meantime? Nothing, absolutely nothing.

They've tried to shelve this problem onto someone else's responsibil ity. Yes, there is a federal role, but there is a provincial role. The provincial role here is the concern of Manito bans keeping a livelihood alive and making sure that all of Manitoba is enjoying a good and prosperous life, not a narrow, sectarian interest that seemed to promote the people from across the way. No one holds a party membership in that part of the province, but we have a vital group of people who are going to lose their livelihood - (Interjection) - No, they're not, they're leaving.

Why are you trying to drum up membership on the streets? Because you're in trouble. It's in terest ing. Here is a government that was prepared to pay $40 million to $50 million to attract a thousand jobs to this province. They aren't prepared to spend $3 million to help the producers grow the sugar or to ensure that the jobs stay in this province. This government talks about co-operative federal provincial relations, yet when they talk to the Federal Government they can't get anything.

In fact, it wasn't until one of our members from this side of the House went to Ottawa that we started getting some action with the Federal Government. That's not apologizing for a Federal Government; that is getting action. It's action that the Minister of Agriculture was not capable of doing, nor does he want to do it, nor does the First Minister care about this ind ustry because he just wants to dump on someone else.

It's intriguing also to note that this is obviously a complex, long-range problem that needs co-operation on all levels by all people, whether they be growers, the producing company, the province or the Federal Government. But do we have any leadership in that particular area, from the government opposite? The answer is no. In fact, one is reminded of the little story, if you've got nothing to say, shout loud.

Well, the way the Minister was screaming, you know they've got nothing in the cupboard, nor do they have anything planned; nor do they care about Manitobans or preserving the fabric of this community that allows us to grow and prosper, because if we lose this industry I don't know what else we're going to do to attract replacement because it's very expensive and it can't be done easily. Another intriguing thing is that there was co-operation requested in getting funding for the Fort Garry Women's Resource Centre.

But it's interesting, the honourable members across the way dragged their feet in trying to match funding for it and only recently was the Minister able to get approval for it. Yet they do a big advertising campaign about wife abuse, but they're not prepared to fund it. Here we have a program that is vital to the economy of the Province of Manitoba.

They're not prepared to commit money; they'r e not prepar ed to commit leader ship; they don't care about the ordina ry Manitoban, and here, if you look at where the employees come from, a petition that was sent to the First Minister, a petition to the Government of Manitoba: "We, the undersigned, being emplo yees of the Manitoba Sugar Company, request that every possible action be taken to ensure the continuation of the beet sugar industry in Manitoba and Canada.

This province cannot tolerate the loss of revenues generated by the beet sugar industry, nor do we wish to lose the source of livelihood which, until recently, has been secure and satisfying." This is not a leaked document. I'm prepared to table it for the honourable member's education. This was sent to the Honourable Howard Pawley and it's an original document and it has six pages with about 100 names on it; and if you look at their addresses, they come from all parts of the City of Winnipeg and all parts of the province.

If the government is not concerned about those people, then please call the election so we can retire you and get on with the important aspect of government. QUESTION put, MOTION carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Su ppl y to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member for River East in the Chair for the Department of Health, and the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Natural Resources. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SU PPLY SUPPLY - NATURAL RESOURCES MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Committee, please come to order.

We are considering Item No. 7. (a)( 1) Forestry Admi nistration, Salaries; 7.(a)

(2) Other Expenditures; 7.(a)

(3) Grant Assistance - the Honourable Minister. HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, yesterday we had some introductory remarks from both sides with respect to Forestry and with respect to whether or not we are replenishing forests in an adequate fashion. I think we had some reasonable debate on that point. There was one thing that I wanted to mention but I didn't yesterday with respect to reforestation projects and that is Manfor and Abitibi do contribute by way of their agreements towards reforestation at the rate of $1. 75 per cubic metre for Manfor towards 117 0

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 reforestation projects and $2.30 per cubic metre, a part of Abitibi, in their agreement with the province. That's a moving figure. It's related to price of newsprint and whatever. The market place in other words, so it's a moving figure. To date, we have not assessed a levy on all of the other users of our forests in Manitoba and, therefore, there is a large group of people that have not yet contributed to forest renewal.

I should mention that we are giving conside ration to including all people that extract from the forest resource a method of contributing back to forest renewal by way of some levy or fee that might be imposed. We haven't firmed that up yet but I just want to mention that is a direction that we likely will be taking. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: I thank the Minister for those comments. A question comes to mind like the figures that he used with Manfor and Abitibi, does that come back into the department and is that then being used for reforestation? HON. S.

USKIW: Well, as I understand it, we collect the revenue and then we commit it back to reforestation projects. That's on the Abitibi one. MR. A. DRIEDGER: How about on Manfor? My concern that I want to raise with the Minister, I certainly have no dif ficult y with the fact that qu ota hold ers, for example, that are not contributing at the present time from the torch reforestation, that some kind of a levy maybe be worked out on those lines.

I'd want to be very concerned that these kind of funds would then be used specifically for reforestation and that it would be not be channelled off as government is sometimes prone to do and seems to be wanting to do with Hydro to channel funds off into the common coffers or other funds. I think if - (Interjection) these levies ... HON. S. USKIW: Day care centres for forest workers. MR. A. DRIEDGER: I wouldn't be surprised if that was probably one of the things that was being looked at.

I'd feel very concerned that any of these monies that were raised through potential fees against operators that that all went back in there. That raises the other question that I wanted to pose to the Minister is related to the Manfor operation. The time when I was up there, we were talking to some of the operators and some of the truckers and they're hauling for one heck of a long distance alrea dy. Are we running into a problem? Have we taken stock of this situation, in terms of how fast we are depleting our forest resource around Manfor? Is there a concern?

If so, what are we looking at in terms of correcting that? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I'm advised that the harvesting of wood in that area is within the area designated for Manfor so it's not gone beyond the original expectation - to date, at least it hasn't. MR. A. DRIEDGER: On these agreements that have been worked out between Manfor and Abitibi, there is a differential in the price right now. What length are these agreements? Are these renegotiated from time to time or is this a 10- or 15-year program? HON. S.

USKIW: There's only one agreement and that's with Abitibi and that's a 20-year agreement and it's renewable every five years. I don't recall when it commenced - 1979 - so 1999 is the first renewal date for that agreement. MR. A. DRIEDGER: What is the arrangement then with Manfor? The Mini ster has ind icated ther e is an agreement with Abitibi, a 20-year agreement, renewable every five years. HON. S. USKIW: With respect to Manfor, the $1 .75 that is sho wn is an in -hous e figure.

They are impl ementing the program and they are assessing themselves $1. 7 5 toward the reforestation projects at the Manfor area; so it's not money collected and then rebated. It stays within the corporation for that purpose. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Do they do their own administration or does the department have people that monitor this to make sure that the program is effective, as planned, that the funds are actually being spent for reforestation? HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, the department has to concur in the program and we monitor it on an ongoing basis, so that we're apprised of what is happening in that area with respect to that agreement. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Just so it's a little clearer in my mind, we have nursery stations at The Pas. Do they work in conjunction with Manfor, in terms of the reforestation program? Do they buy the seedlings from the government? How is this program working? If the Minister could maybe just give us a little bit of insight into the matter, then we can under stand it better. 11 71 HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr.

Chairman, the nur sery at The Pas is specifically designed and designated for support to Manfor, the reforestation in the Manfor area. MR. A. DRIEDGER: So the government has the nursery there and raises the seedlings and gives them to Manfor or do they sell them to Manfor? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, the Manfor Corporation produces the seed. The greenhouse, which is our operation, grows the seedlings and then the Manfor people then do the planting. Our input as a department is merely the greenhouse operation. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: Fine, then I want to get closer to home, in my area where I think probably the southeast area is the most pressurized in terms of requirements for quotas and everybody wants to get into the act there, even more so, I believe, than in the rest of the province. We have a program in place right now, I believe, the planting program that is taking place in the southeast every spring. I wonder if I could maybe get some information as to the extent - I know it's going on every spring Is +his being escalated as well? Have we tied

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 that into the federal-provincial agreement in terms of escalating that program or is it a certain amount of seedlings that are planted each year? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, there is an escalation in replanting activity in the area. It is part and parcel of the federal provincial agreement, Mr. Chairman. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Can the Minister roughly indicate for the southeast region the amount of seedlings that are planted? The employment factor is a big factor out there because a lot of people get employment from this.

Roughly how many people do we employ in the field and how many seedlings will we be planting roughly in a year? Just to have an idea. HON. S. USKIW: Yes, we employ about 180 people and plant about 2 million seedlings. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Every year? HON. S. USKIW: Weil, that's the latest. That's to be increased as we move along. The employment period is rather seasonal, however, it's a short period of about a month or six weeks. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: We have a major unemp loyment problem, I think more so in the southeast and other parts of the province as well, but this is one where a lot of people look forward to generating additional income during that period of time. I just had a few phone calls where most everybody would like to really gain employment through that aspect of it. What is the normal procedure that is taking place in terms of employing people? The calls I get are not from the people that have been hired; the calls I get are from people who have not been hired.

This is getting into a little bit of a more personal thing, but individuals that have tried for three years to get on seemingly cannot qualify, people that are unemplo yed and in need of the employment and that is why, the question that I basically want to pose to the Minister, what is the procedure in terms of hiring? Are the local individuals who have responsibility there, do they pick at their own will who they hire or is there a system in place? HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, the member might have overlooked the fact that there is an agreement with the MGEA so that past employees are the first ones to be recalled; and it's only when we go beyond that list that we then advertise for additional . . . And the additional ones are taken on on a first come, first served basis. MR. A. DRIEDGER: The Minister is saying, people who have been then emplo yed under the tree planting program in the past years are the ones that get priority and then, if additional staff is needed, it's done on a first come, first served basis. Fine. MR.

CH AIRMAN: 7.(a) (1) - pass; 7. (a)(2)-pa ss; 7.(a)(3)- pass. 7. (b)

(1) Forestry Inventory: Salaries; 7.( b)

(2) Other Expenditur es - the Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: I just want to pursue this a little further here, in terms of, at the present time under Wildlife, we have a five-year report which sort of brings us up to date, that has been started to give us a gauge as to what is happening with our wildli fe resources. Do we have a similar situation where we establish which way our funds are going with forestry or how do we actually establish inventory? Could the Minister maybe elaborate on that? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, 1986 will be the year when we will receive the five-year report on forestry.

It's a year down the road, a similar process, as the member is alluding to. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Every five years a report comes down indicating ... Has this process taken place a few times already or is it just really . . . HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, this is the first five year renewal that we are going to witness, a year from now. MR. A. DRIEDGER: So we will be using this report when it comes down. The inventory report has the base. What happens then, five years from now we'll be able to establish which way our trends are going or do we have an idea that we are running into difficulty with our forest products?

HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I would have to assume that the '86 report will be fairly comprehensive. I would imagine it's more than just a base report, but rather a report on what actually is happening, on an ongoing basis. I believe it is a report that, I believe, statutorily is required to be tabled. I think it's a statutory provision. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Just coming back to inventory of the southeast for a minute. Quota holders are allowed to cut so many cubic yards - some spruce, some poplar or whatever the case may be. HON. S. USKIW: Currently metres. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: Metres, okay, whichever way you want to deal with that. Of course, there's no increase in this. Has there been an decrease in the allowable cut across the board or are we concerned that we have a reasonable amount of timber resource available over a period of years? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, there was a minor decrease as a result of the wind problems that we've had in the area and some forest harvesting that took place as a result. There was a fire too, and drought and wind. MR. A. DRIEDGER: From the time that I got elected, Mr.

Chairman, I've always had pressure from individuals in the area, some who were the parents, I guess sold their quota and the young fellows want to get back in to the busi ness. We've been going through the windmill with that a few times already. Is there still a fair amount of pressure in that regard? Has the department become aware that there's still a lot of pressure in that direction where additional operators want to get into the industry? HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, logically, in a regulated industry you will always have that problem 117 2

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 because you are artificially restricting the number of people in the industry. That in itself dictates that there will be lineups, if you like, or backlogs, a demand for quota - not an intensive demand but there is evidence of that. MR. A. DRIEDGER: At the present time, it is my understanding that if an operator wants to sell out his quota, he is allowed to do so. The market dictates the price and the system seems to have worked reasonably well over a period of time. Is the Minister contemplating any changes in that procedure? HON. S. USKIW: No, Mr. Chairman. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: Just a comment. It's funny how within one go vernment, we have a Mini ster of Agriculture who has grave concerns about any value on quota in the cattle industry and other industries and in the forest industry, we don't seem to have that kind of a concern. That is why I'm glad the Minister feels that system will be ongoing and is a reasonably good system. Maybe he could talk with his Minister of Agricultur e and jus t tell him how successfu lly it's working and that possibly there are other areas where this could be done. HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I thought the member was going to suggest that I be as consistent in this respect as all previous Ministers were or governments were with respect to the inconsistency of quota values as between various departments. We are consistently inconsistent and I think we've been that way now for decades. All governments have and I suppose that's where the ... MR. A. DRIEDGER: Well, Mr. Chairman, I can appreciate that kind of comment but . . . HON. S. USKIW: It's consistent here. It's inconsistent elsewhere. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: Just because things have been going one way for a long time doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement and one would anticipate that this would be the kind of Minister who would probably make sure that if there are corrections to be made that he would make them. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I'll defer to my colleague for Kirkfield Park who has a question on Dutch Elm. What part of the Forestry are you on, Mr. Chairman? Which part of the Forestry are you on? MR. CHAIRMAN: We are now considering item 7.(b)( 1) and 7.(b)(2). MR. J.

DOWNEY: Okay, I'll wait till we get into the .. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Roblin -Russell. MR. W. McKENZIE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wonder can the Minister give me any advice regarding Duck Mountain, the inventory of the Duck Mountain Provincial Park forestry? MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. S. USKIW: I wonder if the member wants some specific information on the inventory. We have done the inventory. MR. W. McKENZIE: Well, like the amount of lum ber that was taken out last year, Sam. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, we can dig that up. In the meantime, we should carry on with the discussion. MR. W.

McKENZIE: Okay, fine. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(b)(1)-p ass; 7.(b)(2)- pass. 7. (c)( 1) Tim ber Management and Developme nt: Salaries; 7.(c)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Ju st a qu estion, this Timb er Management and Development. This would be part of the group that works with th e feder al-provincial agreement. Am I correct on that? MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. S. USKIW: No, Mr. Chairman. The federal provincial agreement is merely the Forest Renewal Program. MR. W. McKENZIE: I see. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. W. McKENZIE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. unde rstand that their plans are under way for a forest centre in the Duck Mountains at Singush Lake.

I wonder can the Minister give the committee a breakdown of the plans for the development of this forest centre as to buildings or the structures that's involved and the staff. HON. S. USKIW : Mr. Chairman, that is no t a government operation. That is the Forestry Association that is launching that program, with support from the department, but it in essence is an association venture. MR. W. McKENZIE: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(c)(1)- pass; 7.(c)(2)- pass. 7.(d)

(1) Silviculture: Salaries; 7.(d)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Just for clarification, is this where the planting program is under? HON. S. USKIW: Partially, Mr. Chairman. We will find that in three areas. This is only one of the areas. Also under Northern Development Agreement, there's a component there and there's a component in the Jobs Fund 2 w• 117 3

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 MR. A. DRIEDGER: Could the Minister maybe clarify the Jobs Fund aspect of it? Where do we find that? - (Interjection) - Well, okay, the Minister indicates that the Planting and Pruning Program is split up three ways. One is under this category, one is under the Northern Development Agreement and part of it is under the Jobs Fund. Has money been taken from this department and transferred over to the Jobs Fund for the purpose of planting and pruning or how do we work this game about hiding those funds? Well, I shouldn't say hiding maybe.

We always have difficulty establishing exactly how much mo ni es is gone out of each department into that Jobs Fund aspect of it. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I'm advised that all of the money is new money. There's not been a shift of money. The Jobs fund money is new. It's an additional amount. MR. A. DRIEDGER: The monies that have gone into the Jobs Fund for the purposes of planting and pruning, that is new money that hasn't come into this category here at all? The department still administrates the aspect of the work undertaken.

Do we have any amount that would be affiliated to Jobs Fund for the purpose of Natural Resources of the planting and pruning? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, there are $6 million in the Jobs Fund component for this purpose of which 3 mi llion is part of the agreement and 3 million is in the sectoral. MR. A. DRIEDGER: $6 million that are related to work to be un dertaken in the Department of Natural Resources, am I correct on that? HOii!. S. USKIW: I wonder if the member would repeat that question. MR. A. DRIEDGER: The Minister is mentioning $6 million.

Is that the component from the Jobs Fund that would be directed into the Department of Natural Resources for planting and pruning? Is that a total of $6 million just for that aspect of it? HON. S. USKIW: The member will note on Page 139 under the Job s Fund designation, there's a recovery from Canada of $350,000 at the bottom line of 1. (a). That is the federal share of that particular portion. We don't have the complete breakdown like where the federal people share in that. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, what I'm trying to establish is we have here the Estimates under Forestry and Natural Resources the amount of monies that are going to be expended for various things. Then, the Min ister tells me that through the Jobs Fund there is an additional $6 million that will be spent within the Department of Natural Resources which we don't really have an idea where it's at or what it's being used for. We assume it is being used for replanting and pruning and things of this nature, right? My argument and concern that I have, Mr. Chairman, is that it does not really give us a true picture of what is happening.

It bothers me a little bit that we have sort of a $6 million portion hidden away somewhere that is act ually being util ized within the same department. It doe sn't show it here. It'll be showing under Jobs Fund. I wonder why that approach is being used. Why would they not at least put it in here to effect the kind of work un dertaken within th at department? HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I can enumerate for the member the various components of the 6 million. It's 6,092,000; under ERDA (

a) Forest Renewal, we have 744,000; under Forest Management, 280; under Nursery Development and Technology Transfer, we have 1.2 in Capital, 870 in current for a total of 2. 73 million; and in the Information and Admin istration, $6,000.00. In the sectoral part we have Forest Renewal, 1, 073,500, Forest Management 1, 276,900, Nursery Devel opment 508,600, Public Information Admin istration 130,000, for a total of $6,092,000.00. MR. A. DRIEDGER : That's fine. I appreciate the information. I still come back to the question of why is this approach being used?

Why would it not at least be within these Estimates under Natural Resources a category that would show us exactly what's happening there because, as I indicated before, we don't get a true picture because there's actually going to be more monies spent in this department than is indicated right here because of the agreements. I have no argument with the agreement. It's just the way that it is being handled in terms of us viewing it. HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, the components in the regular sections are ongoing components.

The enhancement of the program is found under the Jobs Fund and that's where the money was found for the enhancement. MR. A. DRIEDGER: I can only assume then that part of the reason why we use this approach is that under the Jobs Fund we'll be having green signs all over the forests ind icating this is a Jobs Fund Project and it gi ves th e op portun ity for the Mi ni ster and his government to keep on advertising as they so much love to do in all in the little things and the things that they do. I can only assume that is one of the reasons why we are using this kind of an approach. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 7.(d)(1) - pass; 7.(d)(2)- pass. 7.(e)

(1) Forest Protection, Salaries; 7.(e)

(2) Other Expenditures. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, before we get on to that, if the Member for Roblin would look up the Annual Report on Page 57, he would find the information that he was seeking. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(e)( 1) Forest Protection, Salaries; 7.(e)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Emerson. HON. S. USK IW: This is where Dutch Elm Disease can be dealt with too. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I understand that this is the area where we're dealing with Dutch 11 74

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 Elm Disease. I think many Manitobans, including people in the city have a very major concern. We discussed this last year to some degree as to whether our program of trying to control the Dutch Elm Disease is really being effective and are there alternatives. At one point in the stage, Mr. Chairman, I was to the point where I would have been prepared to recommend that we almost cease and desist with a program of trying to control it because it seems we're losing the battle; but I have since been informed that it's a matter of maybe trying to slow down the process of the Dutch Elm Disease.

Ulti mately I don't think we'll be the winners in this thing. It's a matter of how fast can we possibly replant, especially when we look at the City of Winnip eg and my colleagues will probably want to touch on that.

The criticisms that I raised last year is that what we've done in our control program is we've sent people out into rural areas, as well as city, where they checked to see which trees are diseased, but the main effort has always been in controlled areas, in people's yards and stuff of that nature, whe reas when we consider that the river banks, the uncontrolled areas, that there's virtually no effort made in that regard at all and it just seems like such a futile effort People find it hard to understand when we promote the idea of having a , control program in place and we do it only in their yards; it's a very emotional thing for some people when our inspectors come in and say, this tree is diseased and has to be removed and 100 yards closer to the river where maybe the property isn't owned and is sort of in the raw, that virtually no effort is made in controlling it there.

So I just wonder if the Minister can maybe indicate the direction that he and his department are planning to go on this thing and what he views as happening within the next five years, let's say. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the current program is what probably will continue indefinitely into the future and that is an urban control program, cities, towns, villages, but apart from that I believe we have to admit that we've already lost the battle. There's no way in which we are able to stop the spread of Dutch Elm Disease throughout the province.

It's just a matter of time till all of our elms have been destroyed, I would imagine. What we are doing with the urban control program is prolonging the life of elm trees in that controlled area. In the City of Winnipeg we've reduced the mortality rate to less than 1 percent per year, which means that we will have elm trees in Winnip eg for many many many decades, perhaps another 100 years; but eventually they too will succumb; at least that's the prognosis.

So it's a holding action in order to give tlie urban communities an opportunity to plant other species and to give them a chance to develop and to become the replacement trees for the elm trees that are going to be destroyed eventually. I think that's about as much as we can do. The disease has become rampant throughout the province and essentially we have abandoned all of the rural areas except those in the designated buffer zones. MR. A. DRIEDGER: I agree with the approach that's being taken. I don't know what else can be done. But what concerns me, Mr.

Chairman, is the fact that to what extent is the department now promoting, let's say, the reseeding or replanting of trees that will not be affected by this kind of a disease. It's a long process. Possibly we should be looking at having our nurseries promoting extensively the fact that there's going to be a heavy drain or a lot of requirement for trees, to replant the ones that are being moved out.

In conjunction with that I want to raise that concern, that the government had a nursery in the Birds Hill area which I understand was ornamental trees or trees that could be used for that kind of purpose and here the government sees fit to close it down at a time when there's going to be muc h more requir ement and pressure on that kind of industry than ever before. If they ever chose a bad time to close it down, I think now was the time.

The Minis ter indicates it's under Parks and we'll deal with it then, but my gosh, here we have a tragedy that's taking place among our Dutch Elms; we'r e looking at doing major replanting throughout the cities, towns and villa ges and the Minister sees fit to shut down the one major nursery that has ornamental trees that would probably be a big factor in terms of replanting. HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I'm very intrigued by the notion that the Member for Emerson would want us to become the main tree nursery in Manitoba for all public needs and to the detriment of all the private sector people that are hopefully trying to squeak out an income or a living from that very industry. I don't think it's inconsisent because I believe that the private sector is able to provide the service and fulfil! the need at a price perhaps cheaper than what we could provide if we did it ourselves, in any event.

The logic of closing down the Birds Hill Nursery is that we are able to provide for our needs much cheaper by simply buying the stock that we need on a regular basis. But if the member insists and he wants to be dogmatic and wants to get rid of the private sector, well we'll give it a second thought, Mr. Chairman. MR. A. DRIEDG ER: Mr. Chairman, the Mini ster 's exceedingly slippery with these kind of things and is very capable of playing with words. I just raised some of the concerns that maybe the time was no t appropriate.

I never indicated that we should do away with the private sector because we certainly believe more in that than this government does and I find his approach actually almost like a breath of fresh air, that this government should start looking at promoting the private sector, for a government that has always wanted to have their hands on everyt hing and control everything, they're now promoting the private aspect of it. For that, I compli ment him. I wonder if all his colleagues feel the same way in that respect, but I'm happy that at least one member of their party does. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage. MR.

L. HYDE: Mr. Chairman, I'm concerned about Dutch Elm Disease Program and my first question is to the Minister, what specie of tree is your department specifically ready to take place over the elm tree? What are they pro:iosing? 11 75 •

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 HON. S. USKIW: We will be introducing a species to the members in the next week or so. During Manitoba Forestry Week you're going to get an elm tree. - (Interjection) - No, it'll be a Japane se Elm. MR. L. HYDE: Japanese! Well, that'll be different. You're going to have the forest and the trees in the Chamber once again, are you? Is the program spreading beyond the border of the rivers and streams today? Is it broadening farther away from the shorelines of our . . . HON. S. USKIW: I presume the member wants to know the scope of our control program.

In essence, we have a buffer zone around participating urban centres, towns, villages and cities, beyond which we are not involved at all in a program; we have abandoned the rest of the province. It's a hopeless case and we were not able to deal with the spread of the disease. We are trying to buy enough time so that urban centres may be able to restock or replant and allow some period of growth so that these new trees will be replacing the ones that we'll be eventually eliminating from those urban areas.

It's a simultaneous thing it gives some time for the co mmuni ties to plant their new young trees and, hopefully, by four or five decades, we will have an ample supply of new growth that will slowly take over from the ones that are going to be eliminated. I gave a figure with respect to Winni peg a moment ago, and that is that to date we have succeeded in reducing the mortality rate to less than 1 percent a year in Winnip eg. We hope we can continue that kind of performance which, in essence, will give us almost 100 years of time to do something about new varieties and new growth. MR. L. HYDE: Mr.

Minister, the City of Portage la Prairie, I believe will be in the program, as well. HON. S. USKIW: Yes. MR. L HYDE: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, in 1982, when the agreement was signed with the City of Winnipeg, the Dutch Elm Agreement, the grant was $350,000.00. What is the grant this year? HON. S. USKIW: $350,000.00. MRS. G. HAMMOND: That hasn't improved then in the last three years.

The Minister has indicated that the loss is less than 1 percent a year in the City of Winnipeg, and yet the city seems to be alarmed at the numb ers of elms that are being diseased and are dying, and have put into the tune of something like $700,000, and are looking for extra funding to help. What is the discrepancy here between the province and the city? HON. S. USKIW: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I'm not aware that there's any major disagreement as to the loss ratio 117 6 for a year between the City of Winnipeg and the Province of Manitoba, but I believe the city is pushing for a more aggressive campaign notwithstan ding, but I don't believe there's a disagreement on the size of the problem, if you like, or the scope of the problem. MRS. G.

HAMMOND: Is there any chance then that the department will be putting in any more money to match the city's funding on this program, because, nothwithstanding what the Minister has just said, they seem to be feeling that this is going to be extremely accelerated and that the trees are going to be disappearing at a much faster rate. HON. S. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, we do have a formula that applies provincewide, and I guess to enhance the city's portion would mean that we would, either have to enha nce the cont ributing to all of Mani toba muncipalit ies to be consistent, or we would have then a discriminatory situation in favour of the City of Winnip eg. The province does share in grants to all of the controlled communities to the extent of 50 percent of the total, and the total, of course, is arrived at on a dollar per capita basis. If you look at Winnip eg, our input is $350,000, which implies 700,000 population in essence.

In other words, we have equity between Winnip eg and non-Winnipeg areas with the present program. To do what the City of Winnip eg wants would create an inequ ity, so we would either have to upgrade the program for all of Manitoba or stay where we are. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Is it possible that the city is correct, that it is going much faster than what the province is perceiving as far as the death of the elms and the spreading of the disease? HON. S. USKIW: The information I have is that that is not correct. MRS. G.

HAMMOND: Last year they had a volunteer program, it was announced by the province, I guess, and the city, it was called Elm Guard. Is that an ongoing program? HON. S. USKIW: That's our program, it was promoted by the department, yes. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Is it continuing this year? HON. S. USKIW: In fact it's expanding, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I just have a couple of questions dealing with this. The Dutch Elm Disease Program, they were concentrating on the City of Winnipeg, there was some work in Selkirk . HON. S. USKIW: Towns, villages. MR. J. DOWNEY: Yes.

Is that program still in effect? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, Mr. Chairman, througho ut the province of Manitoba it is, 39 communities in total are involved.

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the other one that I'm interested in, has there been any money put into the breeding of trees, the resistance of . . . Maybe this is a little repetitive, but I didn't hear whether there had been any money spent on it, and has there been any amount? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, what we are essentially doing is promoting other species, and I mentioned a moment ago that we will be introducing the Japanese Elm next week when we declare Forestry Week. MR. J.

DOWNEY: I was aware the Siberian Elm has been one of the replacement trees - I believe it was the Siberian Elm, was it not? - that was resistant. There was one that was introduced about five years ago - not a Siberian, it was another name. I'm just wondering how it is performing in the resistance. HON. S. USKIW: Two points. First of all, it's the federal research people that are working on the aspect that the member is expressing an interest in. We, of course, are beneficiaries from that effort, but the only resistant species that we are aware of is the Japa nese Elm. MR. J.

DOWNEY: The trees on the grounds of the Legislature have been inocu lated annually . Is that program still being carried out in the main city areas, is the inoculation program still being carried out? HON. S. USKIW: Yes. MR. J. DOWNEY: Is the cost still somewhat prohibitive to expand that program to other areas? That's one of the main problems. HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I would imagine that if Minister of Finance were to be advised that we were to launch into a program to protect most of our elm trees through that effort, that he would have to go overseas many more times for more capital. MR. J.

DOWNEY: I think, Mr. Chairman, there is a need to protect them on the grounds of the Legislature and I thought that there had been an announcement several years ago of a tree that has already been developed and there should be some results on that program, and I guess there isn't anything available to tell us today that it's successful or that it isn't. Okay, thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, since I represent "Elm" wood, I'm very interested in this question. I just wanted to ask the Minister one or two historical points and then a couple of current questions.

This Dutch Elm Disease that is rampant in Manitoba, is this something new or has this been going on for the past 100 years? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I believe Dutch Elm Disease has been in North America for a long long time but has been spreading northward from the U.S. and westward from Ontario for a good num ber of years, but has created our problem here only in the last 10 or 15 years. MR. R.

DOERN: Is the Minister telling us that in different regions of the Un ited States and Canada, that in effect elm trees have been completely obl iterated and burned down and cut down, that they're just totally 100 percent diseased? HON. S. USKIW: Yes, for those areas that didn't launch programs, they suffered a very quick demise, if you like, of the elm tree in their commun ities. It pretty well looked like almost a bombed-out area in many of them, especially when they were left standing, tall, dry and leafless, if you like, for years and years.

We, because of our control program, are going to spare us from that kind of spectacle. Hopefully, our program is going to work for a good numb er of years so that there will be a gradual reduction of elm trees in Winnip eg over the next 100 years to .0, I suppose, but it won't be noticeable, or hopefully not noticeable. MR. R. DOERN: The Minister is telling us that he's going to introduce a new Japanese - is it an elm tree - a Japane se Elm tree?

What guarantees are there that there won't be either some Ja panese beetle or germ or insect that comes along with it, or that some hardy Canadian type doesn't start attacking or eating this? I mean, what guarantees do you have that this tree won't be wiped out in a similar way from another insect? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, against nature there are no gu arantees, whether it's animal, human or plant life. The cycles of nature are such that we cannot commit to guarantees. MR. R. DOERN: You're prepared to stand up to the Conservatives, but not Mother Nature. HON. S. USKIW: Right. MR. R.

DOERN: The other question, Mr. Chairman, is, I recall the program, I think, starting on inoculating the trees on the Legislative Building grounds in the mid to late Seventies, and I'm just wondering how long that program has been in effect and what the costs are. I'm sure it's $10 0 a tree per year or whatever it is, but I mean obviously the Minister and the government is correct in spending money to preserve the trees here, which is a focal point, and I think the Minister has already said it would be too exorbitant to do on a general basis.

But how long has that program been in effect and how much does it cost approximately, to care for the trees on the basis of one tree per annum? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I would hazard a guess that it's somewhere in the order of $200 a tree. Government Services is responsible for the program on this site, so I really don't have the figure within the scope of this department, but certainly it's obtainable. MR. R. DOERN: And that's been over a 10-year period now? HON. S. USKIW: Several years or more than that, yes, Mr. Chairman. 11 77

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. l. HYDE: Mr. Chairman, I have one question for the Minister. What are the characteristics of this new tree that you're going to start in our province? It no doubt is a shade tree now, but if I want to plant that tree in my yard, should I allow a lot of area, or what do I have to do? A MEMBER: Well, the instructions will come with it. HON. S. USKIW: My information is that it will emulate the elm tree fairly well, branchy, leafy, shady, and needs a lot of space, ulti mately it will need a fair amount of spa ce.

I want to make one mo re comment, Mr. Chairman. MR. l. HYDE: What height will that tree eventually grow? HON. S. USKIW: The nurseries do market these in Manitoba, so they have all the data on them and if the member wishes to pursue it with his local nursery, I think he might be able to get satisfaction more fully than he will here today. MR. R. DOERN: Sam, call it the "Samakazi" tree. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(e)( 1) - pass - the Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. W. McKENZIE: Mr. Chairman, all it shows in that report - and I scanned it - is western or northwestern.

I just wanted a breakdown of the Duck Mountains, if it's feasible. HON. S. USKIW: Okay, Mr. Chairman, that's fair enough. We'll break it down for the member and give it to him. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(e)(1)- pass; 7.(e)(2)-p ass; 7.(f)( 1) Regional Management: Salaries-pass; 7.(f)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass. 7.(g)

(1) Northern Development Agreement - Provincial - Forest Renewal: Salaries; 7.(g)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Yes, I just wondered if the Minister would clarify the Northern Development Agreement. Is that part and parcel of an agreement where this is only one segment of that? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the No rthern Development Agreement encompasses a num ber of departments of government, but as it relates to this department it has only to do with Forest Renewal. So this is what I alluded to earlier, that we had Forest Renewal in three areas in which Northern Development was one of them. The member will note here a $2 mill ion expenditure in that regard.

MR. A. DRIEDGER: Well, maybe just for our clarification under the Northern Development Program, there is Program 4 which says Resource Development, is the category we come under where there is $25 million I think over five years and it refers to Forestry, Fisheries, Wildlife and Agriculture. Is that the program that we're looking at underneath here? So that program would terminate in 1987? HON. S. USKIW: Just a correction, this is the Forestry part of that program. Fisherie s will have some component; Wildlife will have a component; this is the Forestry component. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: And this would continue for another - it was sig ned in'82, the agre ement, and would terminate in '87? HON. S. USKIW: Another two years. Mr. Chairman, this particular portion is the provincial component in any event and will continue even after the agreement is complete. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Okay, this is the provincial part of it, it has nothing to do with the federal-provincial agreement. This is a separate Northern Agreement that is taking place and this one element is the Forestry end of it and the Minister's ind icating that after '87 it will continue? HON. S. USKIW: This portion, yes. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: This portion will continue longer than '87. HON. S. USKIW: As a provincial operation. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Swan River. MR. D. GOURLAY: The Min ister indicated that this is part of the Northern Development Agreement and for the Forestry part of it, the feds do not participate with any dollars in this portion. HON. S. USKIW: Not in this one, no. MR. D. GOURLAY: Do they participate in any part of the province, with resources development? HON. S. USKIW: They may fund forest-related projects, Mr. Chairman, but this is the only Forestry component. MR. D.

GOURLAY: The agreement was for a five-year period, but the Minister has indicated that this doesn't necessarily end the program as far as the province is concerned. It'll be an ongoing program for a number of ... HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I'm advised by the staff here that perhaps the item ought to be pursued under Northern Affairs for the broader question that he's posing, un der the No rthern Deve lopment Agreement. MR. D. GOURLAY: Yes, I appreciate that. I was just wondering why this is under the Northern Development Agreement when it's financed 100 percent by the province. 11 78

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 HON. S. USKIW: Within the scope of the agreement, we've rolled in some of our ongoing programs, so this is part of that. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(g)( 1) - the Member for Swan River. MR. D. GOURLAY: Just for clarification, when we get to Fisheries, will there be a similar program there with respect to the agreement? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, there likely will be. We'll have the Fisheries people with us this evening. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(g)(1)- the Member for Rupertsland. MR. E. HARPER: When we get to Fisheries, could we have a copy of the Fisheries regulations? HON. S. USKIW: Regulations? Sure. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 7.(g)( 1) -pa ss; 7.(g)(2)- pass. Resolution No. 12 4: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $7,763, 100 for Natural Resources, Forestry, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1986 -p ass. The time being 4:30 p.m., we are interrupting the proceedings of this committee for Private Members' Hour. The committee shall resume its deliberations about 8:00 p.m. SUPPLY - HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, P. Eyler: The Minister has some answers to give from questions raised previously. Mr. Minister. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: While staff is getting ready, I'd like to answer some of the questions that I was left with last night that I took as notice. First of all, re the Public Health nurse vacancy in Killarney, this position became vacant on January 18, 1985, when the incumb ent resigned. The vacancy has been bulletined; a selection board has been held and the successful candidate received a letter of offer dated April 17th. The expected start date is mid-May.

The successful candidate is a new Bachelor of Nursing graduate from the School of Nursing and is not available until mid-May, hence the apparent delay in filling the position. During the period that the position was vacant, the area was serviced as foll ows by a public health nurse on a term basis from March 7, 19 85 till the position will be filled on a permanent basis by the Regional Continuing Care Co-ordinator two days each week. Appropriation 21, 4.(c), that is the explanation that was requested for the increase in salaries for the Children's Psychiatric Services.

I am told that is the correct amount, 86,000; and given the information also that two medical officer positions were underfilled in'84- 85. That confirmed what I bel ieved. We do not automatically get the full funding for that, especially in this case when it had been difficult to staff the position. That represented $5 1,5 00 of the total and the balance of 34 reflects such normal increases associated with annual increments, lower staff turnover and qualification pay for the doctor.

In addition, I'm told that salaries had been inflated so that funds could be transferred from Salaries to Expenditur e, in orde r to meet sessi onal fees arrangements while this position wasn't filled. I've got bad news for my honourable friend here, he'll be a bit disappointed. Appropriation 21, 4(c), under what agreement are recoveries made for Children's Psychiatric Services and how much did we receive last year? I'm told the recoveries are made under Vocational Reallocation for Disabled Persons Agreement.

The claims for fiscal year 1983-84 was submitted in'84-85, and we actually received the amount of $497,270; and in'84-85, it's $457, 100.00. The Adul t Foren sic Services, the Head ing ley Correctional Institute, the actual cases in'83-84 were 774. The estimated in 1984-85 was 894. That was a variance of 12 0 or 15.5 percent. It is increase in ability to meet the needs, more consultation hours. The psychiatrist attending Headingley is seeing now between eight and nine inmates visitation. More psychiatric assessments are being recommended by counsellors and other medical personnel attending the facility.

The type of inm ate, violent, alcohol, drug abuser is a determining factor, of course, in the requirement for psychiatric assessment. Other Expenditures, 21, 4.(a)(2). Now, that's that 4.6 increase. During the course of the year, transfers that are approved by Treasury Board are absorbed as part of the adjusted vote for that year. However, since the 4.6 was trans ferred to the Manitoba Health Services Commission, it is not reflected in the reconciliation statement as this represents a transfer within Manitoba Health. The reconciliation statement reflects transfers between different main appropriations.

That's re the Eden Mental Health Centre. We talk about the 4.6 that's not enough had been transferred a year before. I think that's it. I know that there's still the one on that

article in French that should be happening fairly soon. Of course, some of the other answers will be answered now that we're in the Commission when we get to Med icare and so on. I owe an answer to the Member for Turtle Mountain re the Alcoholism Foundation staff. They didn't have any explanation the last time we talked to them; they knew nothing about this in their checking. Mr. Chairman, we are now going to start the Manitoba Health Services Commission.

I would like to inform the committee that it would be my intention to follow the line-by-line as we have printed here, except that we would intend to do Medical Programs before Hospital Programs and Personal Care Homes.

In other words, it would go this way: Admin istration, Pharmacare Programs, Ambul ance Prog ram, Air Amb ul anc e Program, Northern Patient Transportation, then Medical Program and Hospital Personnel, just to make sure that I will be able to present to committee, as I've been doing over the years, the five-year Capital Program and give more time for the members of the Committee to be able to digest it and study it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, before we get on to the order of the Estimates, the Minister indicates that, under the Salaries in 4.(c)( 1), the two positions 117 9

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 were underfilled last year. Now, does .underfilled mean that when they budgeted Salaries in fiscal'84-85 that they had no intention of filling those positions for the entire 12 -month period, hence only budgeted for, say, six months of salary? Is what he means by underfilled? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I think my friend means that as an example. He said six months, I think it's the principle. When I say, yes, I don't mean it was budgeted for six months, but the answer is it wasn't budgeted for the full year. MIR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, the Minister further indicated that salaries were inflated to cover off contract services from psychiatrists which would appear in Other Expenditures. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Not contract, sessional. MR. D. ORCHARD: Sessional fees. Now the question being, those sessional fees are not paid to salaried employees under 4.(c)(1) surely, they must be to outside psychiatrists. Is that correct? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: Okay, the Minister ind icates that's correct. Why would the department take that convoluted a route to put extra sessional fees in?

Why simply wouldn't they have put in Other Expenditures, Sessional Fees? II that's what it's going to go for, then surely it would serve to better present the Estimates to state that Other Expenditures, including sessional fees, are going to be somewhat higher by - I think the Minister indicated, some $30,000 or a portion of the $30,000.00. It makes for a clearer presentation of Estimates.

It begs the question as to whether there are other areas that we haven 't dis cussed in the admin istration of the department where salaries are overinflated so the money can be siphoned off to do other things which should appear in Other Expenditures. HON. L DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, why it was done like that, it was done by the officers at the Commission. I am told that there is more flexibility. I am satisfied and I'm sure, and I think that the members of this comm ittee would be satisfied, that nothing is trying to be hidden here. It is a situation that we have trouble in recruiting the psychiatrists.

This is our first option, the first thing that we'd like to do, first choice. If that isn't done, it has the flexibil ity, we have to hire people to replace them and have the work done, psychiatrists like my honourable friend said that are practising on their own and they're paid on a sessional fee. That would be more expensive than if we had somebody on salary all year, and it's that flexibil ity that we want. But, having our choice, we would certainly much prefer to fill the position. MR. D.

ORCHARD: So then is what the Minister saying that, un der Other Expenditures, and I believe he ind icates now - I haven't got my notes from last night and he can correct me if I'm wrong - I believe that he has most of the positions filled under 4.(c)( 1), the 20 staff positions . . . 11 80 HON. l. DESJARDINS: They're all filled up. MR. D. ORCHARD: . . . if my memory serves me correct. No, he's got one vacancy in 4.(c)( 1), the line we're talking about.

Now if I also recall correctly, the Minister is indicating that, still within Other Expenditures, even through there is only one vacancy, you have sessional fees budgeted. The Minister seemed to indic ate in his last answer that you budget salaries and if you don't hire a psychiatrist, then you use the salary budget for sessional fees when you don't have the psychiatrist on staff. HON. L DESJARDINS: Right. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Now, is it a fair assumption that sessional fees disappear from Other Expenditures if you achieve the hiring of the full complement of whatever numb er of psychiatrists would be part of that 20 manpower staffing complement in 4.(c)? Does the Minister follow what I'm getting at? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Normally that would be right, unless of course there's an increase in demand, we have a chance to recruit somebody else or unle ss we lose a psychiatrist, a position that's filled now.

I think we've discussed that, that is a possibility under a different area, but again in Brandon they were going to lose the medical director there. That is a possibility. It's just the flexibility and if the money is not needed, it won't be spent. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I don't believe the medical director in Brandon . HON. L DESJARDINS: No, no, give that as an example, that you can lose somebody. MR. D. ORCHARD: Yes. Mr. Chairman, the Minister indicated that the recoverable from Canada last year was some $497,000.00. The Estimates last year showed no such anticipated recovery. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: It was the year before - paid last year. MR. D. OR CH ARD: Oka y. Then how do es the government budget their recovery, their recoverable? Is it on the amount of service that is being provided in terms of criminal offences? Is that basically the method of recovery and would this not be much an anticipated figure, if that's the case, and indeed the Minister may recover more than the 457 or, if services offered are less, he may recover less than the 457?

It's tied to the amount of service in the formula whereby services are provided basically, if I understand it, for psychiatric services on offences which involve federal statute. HON. L DESJARD INS: Yes, Mr. Chairman, it is budgeted - it's an educated guess, I guess, and the situation is on services rendered. So we could collect more, we could collect less, depending on the service that is given, and it's only on their rehabili tation program.

Tuesday, 23 April, 1985 MR. D. ORCHARD: It's only under which? HON. l. DESJARDINS: Rehabilitation program. MR. D. ORCHARD: Reapplication? HON. l. DESJARDINS: Rehabilitation. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the Minister has indicated that he wishes to undertake a given course in considering the Manitoba Health Servic es Commission. Last night, I believe he indicated that after we passed the Manitoba Health Services Commission, then the Minister would be tabling the Capital . HON. l. DESJARDINS: No. MR. D. ORCHARD: No, are you going to table the Capital when we hit the hospital program, is that the understanding?

HON. l. DESJARDINS: Well, I'm flexible on this; I'm easy. What I meant last night, if I didn't make that quite clear, that I would try to do it, that we would not be ... I didn't think that we would be dealing with the Hospitals and the Personal Care Homes until next week probably or late this - well, it doesn't give me much time. I un derstand that ther e has been tentative arrangements not to have Estimates on Friday. On Thursday night we'll be doing Sports, so that leaves tonight, sometime tomorrow, a limited time tomorrow and Thursday afternoon.

Fine, if we're ready, if we finish everything else, I would have to do it after. We'd keep the Minister's Salary open and then I would provide the mem bers of the commit tee and then all the members of the House with the five-year Capital. But if it is, as I believe it will be, that we'll be dealing with that, we'll be into next week, especially as I've suggested that we look at Medicare now. If we get that far before we do Hospitals and Personal Care Homes, then early next week.

It will either be sometime Thursday afternoon or Monday morning, as of now anyway, I would propose to release the document or table the five-year program. If my friend would sooner finish everything before we do it, fine, but I thought this way would give the members a chance to discuss it during the Estimates, while we're covering Hospitals and especially Personal Care Homes. MR. D.

ORCHARD: So that I understand what the Mini ster is saying, when we finish Admini strat ion, Pharmacare, Ambu lance Program , Air Ambu lance, Northern Patient Transport, then are you going to rearrange Medical Program and bring it in front of the Hospital and the Personal Care Home Programs? When we have finished the Medical Program in this new order and when we start discussing the Hospital Program and the Personal Care Home Program, is that when the Minister is going to tackle his Capital Estimates? HON. L.

DESJARDINS: Yes, I think it makes good sense to table this and provide the members of the committee with that information before we deal with Hospital and Personal Care Homes. Now if my honourable friend has any other suggestions, I'd be glad to listen to him. Is that satisfactory? MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, that will probably speed up debate considerably. Mr. Chairman, when we're on the Admini stration line of the Manitoba Health Services Committee . . . HON. l. DESJARDINS: I wonder if my honourable friend would allow me to interrupt him to tell him that I'm sending him the information re the staff.

It'll be a detailed page and the other one is just dealing - on the Admin istration, there are 389.5 regular employees, there are 7 on term, and vacancies as of April 1st was 29.5; Laboratory and X-ray Service Division was 292.5, regular, 13 term, for a total of 305.5, and vacancies as April 1st was 3; so the total is 682, 20 on term, for a total of 702 and 32.5 vacancies, so I'll send both these sheets to my honourable friend so he can have it before he starts. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the Minister indicates that there is a total of 32.5 vacant positions.

Is recruiting ongoing or is this more or less a maintained vacancy rate, because if I follow from'8 4-85 to the'85-86 Estimates, it would appear as if the 31 vacancies in Admin istration and Lab and X-ray seem to be fairly constant. Is that a vacancy rate that is not normal to go below and recruitment efforts, if successful, generally coincide with further resignations or shifts to other positions by staff and personnel in Admin istration and L

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-4-33a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 4th hansardpdf 33a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	36cae65d071bcfd2296ee2bcdafd2af9e6bd6a6d

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