I LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPL V SUPPL V - COMMUNITY SERVICES AND CORRECTIONS MR. CHAIRMAN, Morris McGregor {Virden): I call the committee to order. We were on 2.( e)

(1) I belie ve. The Honourable Min ister. HON. GEORGE MINAKER {St. James): Mr . Chairman, as we adjourned at 4:30, the Honourable Member for St. Johns had raised the question with regard to why the question was raised when someone applies for a death certificate, what is the reason you require it for? We had hoped to di scuss the particular question with the Director of Vital Statistics over the supper hour which we were not able to do. However, in looking through The Vital Statistics Act under

Section 31 (5) it states, "Any person upon applying, furnishing in formation satisfactory to the Dir ector and paying the prescribed fee, may if the Director is satisfied that it is not to be used for an un lawful or impr oper purpose and su bject to Subsection 6, obtain a certificate in the prescribed form in respect to the registration of a death. " Further on it goes into appeal from a refusal of a Director with regard to issuance of a certificate. So my understanding in interpreting the Act is that at that time when the Act was amended or this

section was inserted, there was concern that possibly someone may wish to use a death certificate unlawfully. For that reason the Act was written that anyone would be requested to give the reasons why they wanted the death certificate. I don't think the intention is to block the issuance of the death certificate but one rather to make sure that it will be used properly. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Johns. MR. SAUL CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Min ister pointing out the law. I don't really understand it.

There are many certificates that are gotten all over the pla ce that could be used unlawfully or improperly and the fact that it's in the law doesn't necessarily make it sensible. I wonder if the Minister is suppor tive of that or whether he would like to reconsider or look at it and if it doesn't make sense we've got a Statute Law Amemdment Act that will take care of things that are foolish. The reason I mentioned that is that I cannot conceive that it's necessary in the law to protect it because in the end the Director doesn't know an awful lot.

If somebody gives a reason which sounds plausible, why get involved; but breaking the law is breaking the law. Impropr iety is a matter of judg ment which I don't think the Di rector nor the Min ister should get involved in and I'm suggesting that although there may be good and valid reason for having put it in, I don't understand what that reason could be; it maybe should be changed. The only thing that bothers me is the additional trouble that it takes to investigate and I gave you the example. I was asked why do you want it and I said - I don't know - estate purpo ses or something like that.

I told the truth and I used it both lawfully and properly but there is a cost in volved and everyt hing bureaucracy does and if we can save, we should. I'm just going to drop it there and let the Mini ster think about it and I suggest he do it this Session and not wait for another, if he's going to do it at all. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, it's my intention to find out from our Director if and how many have been refused, as the honourable member requested prior to supper break, and further to that, ask him the reasons, if there are any unlawful methods that could come about by having the use of a death certificate of some individual who wasn't one of your family, or whatever. The only other thing I might point out is, there is a concern with the issuance of birth certificates to people, that they might want to use it for false identi ty, which the honour able member understands fully.

But at this time, I don't know the reason why back in 1976 and I belie ve 1969, why that

section was inserted and amended the way it is at the present time. MR. CHERNIACK: For those who have great faith in the hereafter, a death certificate might be useful too. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(e) - the Member for Logan. MR. WILLIAM JENKINS: While we're on this topic, I'd lik e to ask the Min ister if there's been any speeding up in the issuance of the death certificate. Now I'm speaking from personal experience, because I know in 19 69 when my father died, at that time you got the certificate from the City of Winnip eg. The province has now taken it over.

My mother passed away la st year, and if it hadn't been for the intercession of the Mi nister of Health, I would have had to wait at least a month. Now when I made the applic ation for the death certificate for my mother, I was told that it would take three to four weeks. I asked them why the delay. Of course the answer came back, it was the city that held them up.

Well, having sat on the school board with the present mayor, I phoned his office and I must say that he phoned me back in half-an-hour's time, and the delay was not in the handling of the death certificate by the city, but the delay was in the Department of Vital Statistics.

Being as we've had from I think, a $2.00 fee to a $5.00 fee, which is 15 0 percent incr ease and we have now a longer waiting time, I just wonder what seems to be the hold up, since the certificate is issued by the doctor, it goes to the funeral dir ector, and it's turned over from the funeral di rector to the city and that transaction, the mayor assured me, in most cases took three or four days. Now why does it take another 27 days or so, because of the province? MR. MI NAKER: Mr. Chairman, the method of handling death certificates has changed in the past, I guess it's approxima tely a month, month-and-a-half.

We have a new death certificate registration form which speeds up the issuance of a burial permit. lt 2073

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 now consists of two parts to the death certificate: one which a doctor simply has to sign ind icating the identity of the person and the death of the person has occurred at what date; the other part of the death certificate indicates the cause of death, which can be interpreted later on after a burial permit is issued. But again, if the doctor delays the filling out of the form for the cause of death, that can cause a delay.

But now the death certificate registration is mail ed dir ectly from the hospital to our Vita l Statistics Department and they are giving tha t priority, to issue the death certificate or the request for death certificates as soon as received. We anticipate the turnaround time is at the maximum, eight days. The other thing is, even though before, when you used to receive the death certificates from say, the City of Winnip eg, or the City of Thompson, they still had to be certified from the Vital Statistics if it was taken into court or for certain legal purposes.

I might point out that because of the fact that many deaths are now occurring, not in the location where the person normally lives, that the death certificates were normally issued from that location where they died and we feel this method will speed it up and it is our anticipation that it shouldn't be delayed more than approxi mately eight days before you receive the death certificates. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Logan. MR.

JENKINS: Well, I hope the Min ister is right by the experience and the Min ister of Health assured me that he ha d many compla in ts, sinc e the change over in the first of October when the province took over the central issuing of death certificates and you know, three to four weeks is not, and I' ve spoken to other people, they've had the same experience, and that is no t a good record in consideration to what was there before.

There are sometimes estates to be settled and bank accounts to be closed out that can't be closed out unless there is a death certificate and it causes an inconvenience to the people that are handling the estate. If the present Mini ster would look into it and see that the process is working because the first thing I was told, I remember reading the blurb that we got when the province took it over, that it was going to speed it up.

Lo and behold with the first opportunity I had to test it, they told me it was three to four weeks and if it had n't been for the intervention of the Mini ster of Health who I went to personally and asked him if he could speed up the process ... even at that it took about 10 to 12 days which was longer than it was before. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, the official turnover doesn't take place until April 1s t, 19 81, with regard to this new process and we anticipate that we will meet those objectives approxima tely eight days maximum.

I might point out what was happening in some instances, not continually, but would happen is that information had been put onto the forms that were incorrect and the actual death certicate, the official death certificate could not be issued until they were corrected, with the process that has existed for a number of years. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Boniface. 2074 MR. LAURENT L. DES JARDINS : Well, Mr . Chairman, I'm still a little mixed up <'iS to the answer of what has been changed. We are talking about two things at the same time; it seems there is a burial permit and a death certificate.

Now the death certificate if you had it at the time and you could get it through the funeral dir ector and most of them while they were making funeral arrangements would mention this to the family and then get as many copies as they wanted, they would get that when they got the burial permit. So I don't know where my friend talks about the question of weeks. The only thing, is that at times people would not request one at the time, then it took a while because these papers went out and if they left in about a month or so, then they had a delay but that I think was the delay in the death certificate.

The burial permit, what did the Min ister say, the burial permit, the cause of death will go di rectly from the hospital and then you get a death certificate immediately? MR. MINAKER: lt will then be issued from the Vital Statistics Department. (I nterjection)- Wel l, we don't go to the municipal agent any more. MR. DESJARDINS: But don't they need something from the funeral dir ector, a form from the funeral di rector filled and signed by the next of kin without giving all the information? You don't get that on the cause of death.

You see the paper, the registration of death, is a long form like this that has to be filled, part of it by the next of kin giving all the information and then there's a

section that is left for the medical, the doctor, the cause of death and the time and so on and if they're not too sure of the cause of death then there's an autopsy or post-mortem. The delay was mostly the medical profession. You could wait in the office of a doctor for three hours and then they'd say, well sign it and they'd lose it somewhere or forget to give it to you. Technically you could not bury anybody until you got a burial permit. But in fact some of them would lose those forms, you'd have to start all over, it would take months. But we're talking about two dif ferent things.

I might say the Mini ster said that sometime there was a question that wasn't answered correctly but I don't recall now but your Deputy Minis ter will probably remember that I brought him some examples of the asi nine thin gs. Some of those people in the office at the time would not use their brains at all, some of the things were minor things but some of them were answered correctly and they would send back to get an explanation that was already written on. That'll happen everywhere, you've got some people that are careless or are less intelligent. But I don't what the Min ister is saying.

What is sent dir ectly from the hospital? Another thing the Mini ster said that the death certificate comes from the place of death? lt was always like that, it was always from the municipality; it was never where they come from. But what is it that goes to the hospital to the Vital Statistics and what happens after that? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Me mber for Logan was actually trying to get in on this to clear something, I suppo se. The Member for Logan. MR. JENKINS: What the Member for St. Bonif ace is saying is true. At one time you could get the death

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 certificates from the funeral dir ector but you can't any more; under the new system, you can't get them from the funeral dir ector. You have to go down and apply for them. He gives you an appl ication and that is what I was told, told that by the funeral dir ector. So that causes a delay of anywhere from three to four weeks and that is not good enough for people that have to close bank accounts and settle estates. lt was not the doctor because I checked with the doctor right away to make sure that the death certificate was signed. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, in answering the Honourable Memb er for St. Bon iface first: The registration of death form is still filled out by the funeral dir ector with the relatives and he gets the signature of the doctor ind icating that the person has died. There's two parts to the form. On the other portion of the form is the cause of death; that could be dela yed being sent into the Vita l Statistics Department. However, once the registration of death has been filled out and signed by the doctor, then the funeral di rector can issue the burial permit as well. This has elimi nated where in some cases in the past ... MR.

DESJARDINS: The funeral dir ector issues a burial permit? Oh gee, I'm away behind times. MR. MINAKER: That now has elimi nated the burying illegally of people in the past which has occurred under some circums tances pr ior to the do ctor signing the certificate. Because what was happening is, the doctor, if he wasn't prepared to sign the certificate based on the cause of death, then . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Excuse me, Mr.

Chairman, to the Mini ster through you, the registration form prepared under the resp onsibil ity of the funeral dir ector, you say the medical officer, the doctor signs. Well, he only signs that if the person is dead, not the cause, unless he knows it. MR. MINAKER: That's right. MR. DESJARDINS : If he do esn 't, tha t will go di rectly. I see, okay. MR. MINAKER: But if the doctor is hesitant and bel ieves there is reason that there should be an autopsy and because of the cause of death, then he obviously will not sign that portion of the permit.

Then further to that, that death registration is mailed by the doctor to the Vital Statistics Department who they in turn would issue the death certificates and if the funeral director requests the th ree copies or four copies then they would be provided to him; he can still order them.

What I had indicated with regard to the fact that where the place of death occurs, that the death certificate is issued, it could be that somebody is brought down from Thompson, Manitoba, to the General Hospital or the Health Sciences Centre and dies there, then it would be the City of Winnip eg and the old method that issued the death certificates, not the Town of Thompson where the person resided. So the family could be up in Thompson, so they would 2075 have a delay anyway or could have.

So it was the pla ce of death and now what will happen is the hospitals will mail that form dir ectly to our Vital Statistics Department who in turn will issue the death certificate. I might point out that the death certificates that were issued by the City of Winnip eg and other towns where ind icated were not sufficient for legal purposes. lt indicated on there that they were not sufficient for legal purposes.

In most cases banks wou ld accept them, I bel ieve, and insur ance companies but if it came into a legal dispute they were not legal documents and you would have to get them properly issued from the Department of Vital Statistics. MR. DESJARDINS: The main reason for that, that might come later on but a delay of a couple of weeks, that's not the important thing. I think the delay is important when people want to go ahead to get access to a bank or to hurry up and process the application for insurance benefits, that kind of stuff and a will. They certainly would be using a will. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, I can advise that the policy of the Vital Statistics Department is that the funeral dir ector can apply and they will be given preference in the issuance to try and keep them minimum. I hope that the Honourable Member for Logan will give the new system an opportunity to see if in fact it will be within the eight-day period. A MEMBER: . . . to try again. MR. MINAKER: I hope he won't have to, but the new system really isn't in place at this point until April 1. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(e)(1) - pass. MR. MINAKER: I wonder if the Honourable Member for Logan would like to try it on the birth certificate. MR.

JENKINS: No. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(e)(2) - pass; 3.( a)(1) - pass; 3.(a)(2) - pass; 3.(a)(3) - pass; 3.(b)( 1) - pass - the Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr . Ch airman, I would like clarification; what role does this department have in public health nursing? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, the department is a field resource that del ivers the social services, the public health nursing, family planning services, home economics services, vocational, rehabilitation, child and family services and mental health and mental retardation services.

The public health nurses, of which there are some 17 8, of the total 750, are answerable to our department through the Assistant Deputy Mini ster, who has close liaison with the Min ister of He alth as well as the Mini ster of Community Services. The decision to add public health nur ses are di scussed between the two Min isters and arrived at, based on the rec ommendation of the Minister of Health dir ectorate, where they feel that additional health programs should be either elevated or inserted into the program.

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 MR. CHAIRMAN: I wonder if the committee would allow me to back up. I passed through there so fast, I forgot to read the resolution on 2.

Be it resolved that there be granted to Her majesty a sum not exce eding $3,405,700 for Communi ty Services and Corrections - pass. The Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, I'm looking at Page 74, Item 3.(

b) unde r Hea lth, Public Health Nursing Services, Provides consultative services to regional staff and monitors and refines program standards. Is that what we're talking about? Is that the liaison between Health and Community Services? Does that staff of $1 75,000 monitor and refine the program standards of this department in this item? MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, isn't this the one where the policies and the programs are defined and arrived at in the Department of Health, and the del ivery of service thr ough this gr oup is do ne through this department? That's all there is to it, isn't it? MR.

MINAKER: Is the Honourable Member for St. Johns on Page 7 4 of the Estimates? MR. CHERNIACK: I'm on Page 25, but I'm referring to 7 4, at the bottom of that page where it speaks about Public Health Nursing Services, and here we're dealing with public health nursing and I see that under the Department of Health, the item there is a total of $200,000, and it says, "Provides consultative services to regional staff and monitors and refines program standards." MR. CHERNIACK: Does that mean that they are monitoring and refining the program standards of this Department of Community Services? MR.

MINAKER: Public health component, yes. MR. CHER NIACK: Which means then, that the Minis ter of Community Services has no control over the monitoring and program standards of all these nurses, some 17 8 nurses or so? Therefore, all the responsi bility for the refining of program standards is done by the Min ister of Health, but the deliv ery is done by the Minister of Community Services. Is that right? MR. MINAKER: Mr . Chairman, that's basically correct. There is close coordination between the Minister of Health and myself through the Assistant Deputy Minister, who is working with the field staff.

I might say that the Honourable Min ister of Health and myself are working towards achieving of the amalgamation of the health components of the regional system under the Department of Health over a period of time within the next year. MR. CHERNIACK: Well, that helps a lot for me to understand. Is the Minister now saying that you are working towards a turning over to the Department of Health those aspects of Community Services which deal with health? Is that what the Min ister said? MR. MINAKER: We're basically working towards those objectives, yes. 2076 MR.

CHERNIACK: Well then, looking at this section, Regional Personal Services, which is spending some $3.3 million more than it did last year and spending $16 milli on in salaries, what are we dealing with now? Public Health Nursing goes out. What about Family Planning Services? Is that Health? MR. MINAKER: Mr . Chairman, Public Health Nursing has all the major health programs that we have and deliver in the Regional Services. MR. CHERNIACK: Well yes, but what about Family Planning; is that Health? MR. MINAKER: Yes it is. MR. CHERNIACK: What about Child and Family Services; is that Health? MR. MINAKER: That, Mr.

Chairman, that would come under the Child Welfare Program and would be under our department. MR. CHERNIACK: What about Mental Health? MR. MINAKER: Mental Health would be under the public health aspect or the Department of Health. Mental Retardation Service, Mr. Chairman, would be under our Community Services Program. MR. CHERNIACK: A few years ago there was a good deal of talk about one-stop shopping - is that the expression - where people with needs of a health and community health nature would have one place to which to go to deal with their various problems.

Is that where we were heading and are we still heading there or are we now dividing it up so that they go in different places depending on what the needs are? For example, I should think that The Child Welfare Act, Child and Family Services, should be closely related to Home Economic Services. I would think that they should be very closely related to Family Planning Services. Certainly the health of the family is related to the economic welfare of the family.

If you look at the objective, say under Social Services Advisory Committee, the subject under 1. (b), it speaks about matters relating to the social and economic needs of the residents. But surely we've reached the stage of considering that social and economic needs also relate to the health needs and the health services provided to people. Are we going away from that philo sophy? MR. MINAKER: Mr .

Chairman, even though the departments might be divided like we're supposing the staff would be still working out of the same facilities and would be working together, in the same manner that they basically are at the present time. MR. CHERN IACK: Mr. Chairman, who will be respon sible for the delivery of the program, and "deliv ery" to me means refining and determining the policy. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, the Mini ster of Health would be responsible for the del ivery of the health programs and we would be responsible for the del ivery of the social programs. MR.

CHERNIACK: Tha t means a fam ily with problems, and most families that have one problem

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 have another problem, coming into the fac ili ty operated under this

Section 3.(b), will turn to a public health nurse who may say you've got to have certain diets and then go to the Home Economic Services and say how do I acquire the means whereby I can achieve that diet? Is there going to be one dir ector responsible, or are there going to be separate di rectors respon sible? What is the division of the responsi bility? I'm not so concerned about authority as I am as to responsibility for the deliv ery of the program; the danger I see that it won't be a whole problem dealt with together but rather, split. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, at the present time there is one dir ector that's responsible for the programs and it's anticipa ted that type of responsi bility would continue. I might say, Mr . Chairman, if I could, that at the present time even under the present operations that it could be that someone comes in to see the public health nurse and she will refer him to some other worker in the office that relates to child welfare. lt wouldn't matter whether they worked for the Community Services Department or the Public Healt h Department - there's two separate people lo oking after tha t particular responsibili ty. MR.

CHERNIACK: I've had a constituency problem which could well relate to this field. I really thought it came under Social Security but as we're discussing it I think it probably comes into here and I want to relate what I was informed. A couple, male 23, female 25, both physically disabled from childhood, both on provincial welfare having been - what's the term, boarded? - and both of them convinced that they cannot work at all and therefore expecting complete welfare for the rest of their lives. They're pretty young people to even have that state of mind.

What I felt was, there was a great need to rehabil itate their approach to living and to find the kind of occupations which they can, to some limited extent, carry on. The reason I belie ve it should be possi ble is that when I spoke to the man on the telephone I found that he had the intell igence and the ability to express hi mself in such a way that he should be able to undertake any job relating to telephone communic ations, such as an answering service or a soliciting opportunity.

He had no trouble both locating me, ha ving jus t moved into my constituency, he found out very quickly who his ML A was and he presented his problem rapidly, but he hadn't the sligh test idea of how to handle his budget having spent his total allo wance within I think it was four days, some of it really foolishly and he admitted that to me when we discussed it.

He told me that he could never work and my impression was that maybe he could work an hour a week or an hour a day or have some kind of occupation, my concern being that when I asked him who cut him off - that was his complaint, he'd been cut off - it was his ... I forget the term of the worker that do es the admin istration, the financial advice or the financial overview of the moneys he needs. I asked what social worker was in volved and he wasn't too clear although he had a name in mind.

My question then became, what guid ance is he receiving in terms of budgeting his money and in terms of trying to get involved in some kind of work that would be fruitful for him. Now it seems to me that many of the things we're talking about here, public health, well, they're sick; family planning, that may well be a need on their part; home ec onomic s of cou rse; voca tional rehabilitation obviously, and mental health I think to some extent. Now I'm concerned to know whether this projected separation of responsi bility is going to make it more difficult to work with him because I must tell you Mr.

Min ister, through you, Mr. Chairman, the impression I got was that they weren't getting any help at all except straight welfare. MR. MINAKER: Mr . Chairman, normally under circums tances that the ho nour able member describes the ind ividuals would be referred to the home ec onomis t to deal with the budgeting problems.

Further to that they would be referred to the rehabilitation services that we have and might end up with assistance to provide employment or to in struct them and couns el them on holding employment or they could end up in one of our work activity projects where they are taught basic working skills and employment skills but I might point out, are not work shelters.

They are a program that last for approximately six months where they teach them life skills and other basic skills to retain a job and in addition to tha t they teach them some basic vocational skill and if in that instance the individual in question did not have the capabilities dealing with that type of a project might be referred to the mental retardation rehabilitation field of the occupational activity centers of which again are not workshop shelt ers but are basic trai nin g progr ams for moderately retarded individuals, with the objective in mind hoping to get them to some degree of self­ sufficiency. MR.

CHERNIACK: Would that couple then come under this

section we're dealing with now, Regional Personal Services, or would they relate to one person who would steer them through all these various channels as the Min ister described or would they be shunted around from, go to so and so, and see so and so. MR. MINAKER: Normally, Mr. Chairman, it would be a vocational rehabilitation worker that would handle that specific case and I might point out would fall under the category Community Services in that instance, rather than the Department of Health. MR. CHERNIACK: All right, Mr.

Chairman, so we say a vocational rehabilitation officer would then be the one to take them into every one of these various opportunities and how would the person come there, since, when I started making my inquiries I ended up under Social Security Services. Why is that? MR. MINAKER: Probably what would happen, Mr. Chairman, is that the indi viduals would requir e income first so they'd naturally go to that position but the social workers, after an interview, should refer them to these other indi viduals. MR.

CHERNIACK: I just want to make sure; would they end up with one individual who is responsible now to see to all their needs and where would that individual be situated, under which section? 2077

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, it would normally be one case worker but it could end up permanently with another case worker depending on whether it was a mental health or mental retardation worker. lt would depend on the individual hi mself. In this case you say that the individual is not mentally ill or mentally retarded so I'd presume that they would stay with that worker. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Bonif ace is very urgent to get in on this to maybe help the committee - the Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, if I may, I think that when the government decided to divide the committee, the two departments, there is no doubt that this was a very di fficult exercise. lt was done before, then they were married again, and then it was divided in a different way and this is what the concern that we had, when this was done, because it's so close there is a dup lication and it's very closely related.

But now I'm concerned after the explanation of the Mini ster, because this year, if you're going to to divide the two committees, this makes sense, the way it is now, because the programs are developed and monitored by the Department of Health.

I'm not saying it's the best situation but all the deliv ery is done here and the Minis ter of Community Services is only responsible, the staff is his responsibility through the ADM or relates to the Department of Health very closely, and if you don't do that, if you start, the Mi nister is saying that they might start dividing that, then your central del ivery system is shot all to hell, and that is what this is all about. You know, public health is not necessarily for people that are sick. lt's prevention, most of it, and a lot of it is prevention.

And the system was, if I remember it correctly and I stand to be corrected, that the central del ivery was that you'd have a group of people, you'd have a group captain, let's say, who would make the initial contact and then see what is needed and then send the proper people. But they work as a team and if you're going to divide that you're going to have dup lication. There is too much dupl ication now. I think we were told there's an awful lot of dupli cation. Don't tell me there is no dupl ication because I know families who are dealing with five different social workers.

You have a social worker for this, a social worker for that, another social worker for something else and that's not easy, and that existed in our day. We were just addressing ourself to that to try to do something about it but it is a problem and there, anybody that solves that will save many dollars and a lot of problems.

Now I would hope that this will not, if their going to keep two Mini sters, well then I would hope that they will at least give this a try and not abandon the central deliv ery system that we have now and to make sure that it can be done, the Minis ter has the responsi bili ty of the people in the field. But that doesn't mean that the people in the field can not talk.

The public nurse could very easily talk with the dir ectorate that will develop the programs. lt is not necessarily the best but the other thing is that it's such a big load for one Min ister. lt seems to me that what they did though, there are other areas where they have mental health under one Min ister and mental retardation under another one. I don't 2078 particularly like that arrangement but the concern is now that you've made your decision to have two Minis ters, I said two Min isters, to di vide the department into two.

Well, go very slow in thinking of abandoning something that was working and that is working fairly well. That is, that you'll have a central del ivery system. Some of them get their marching orders, if I might use that, from another department, that's right. But tha t ha ppens in a lo t of the departments and at times there has to be very close relationship between the dif ferent Min isters.

You know, this government laughed at the idea of the time we wasted and they got rid of all the departments, the committees that we had, when we had HESP and that's exactly why we had HESP, a committee of Cabinet, where you had the different Ministers that were related. For instance, if you're talking about fitness now, you felt it was another thing. Take fitness and amateur sports and give it to somebody else and the role of the government in fitness is mostly in that and in sports, it should be mostly in amateur sports and always keeping their eyes on the fitness of the people, and there you can't do it alone.

You need nutritionists, you have to talk to the Mini ster of Health again and the Mini ster of Community Services. So I understand that the government decided to have two Ministers. This is not perfect but I would hope that they'll resist the temptation, like the Minis ter was telling us that they probably will change this and public health. The people in the field will go to the Department of Health and Vocational Rehab and, no excuse me, Family Planning and some of the se things.

So you 'r e going to have mor e dupli cation, you are going to have more social workers and it's going to cost you a lot more money and you'll have to have two teams instead of one because now you go with one person. lt could be the team captai n. lt might be a public health nurse. Does that still work like that and then you have, they see where the needs are. After talking to people, they need some advice, like the Member from St. Johns was saying, in preparing a budget or doing things, they'll be dir ected to the right people and that way you can get a handle on it.

There's dupli cation up to a certain point, but the dupli cation is less amongst this group that del ivers that service than the others that are delivering other services. So if anything, instead of dividing that, you should be looking at the possi bility of bringing more of these things in this central del ivery, where you have a child that might have trouble in schools, there's somebody from the Gui dance Clinic, somebody from the municipa lity; there's somebody that has trouble on welfare, there's somebody there; somebody that has dr inking problems, there's somebody else.

You're bringing Public Health to help them realize what it is to keep the place clean, and there's no end to it. This is a good start and I would be very di sappointed if the Min ister is going to divide it. I think you've got to make it work, you decide to cut it, and it can work like that. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, I wasn't here at the time, but I understand that the Min ister of Health in his Estimates ind icated that he would like to see the Regional He alth Services under his particular department. He has indicated that to me. We've had di scussions on it, and that's what I was indi cating to

I Tuesday, 24 March, 1181 the Committee. As far as any final decision on that matter, it has not been made, but I just wanted to answer you the way the status is at the present time. I know that the Min ister of Health had indicated to the Honourable Member for St. Bon iface, I believe, in his Estimates, that it was his desire to get these health services back under his department at some time in the future. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, if I may to the Min ister. He was very vague or I would have had the same reaction. If he tries to destroy the central del ivery, I think that's wrong, and I think it can work.

MR. MINAKER: I'll take it under advisement. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, the reason brought that example, which is still before us, haven't dropped it in my mind, but it is ind icative of a very large problem. I guess the Member for St. Boniface and I were the only ones present who remember when we had a Welfare Min ister and a Health Mini ster, and at that time, there was a great deal of di scussion that the Welfare Minister should not be separate and apart from the Health Mini ster, because the problems were so closely related.

Well then, gradually, I think progress was made in the recognition that families in trouble often have a multiplicity of troubles, and that they must relate one to the other. The reason I use this example, which I think is a good example, the only thing that would make it a better example but a worse situation, would be the problem of a couple of children in the family with their own problems, that there has to be one central place where they report. People are so frustrated when they have to deal with government to find out to whom to turn.

We ML As and all ML As, must have had occasion to say, "Well, who is your worker? Where is your worker? ", and disc over there is more than one worker involved in dealing with that person's problems. Now our government groped for a while with the problem of one Mini ster having the responsi bility that was jus t over whe lming, which it was when the Member for St. Bonif ace was faced with the entire problem, when his preceed ing Mi nisters were, and it seemed necessary to divide it.

But that's why it seemed advisable to form a committee of the Min isters so that they didn't run irito any problems of conflict each with the other, on a one-to-one basis, but rather were able to work through a central committee that would review all policies. That is probably better than one Mini ster having two assistant ministers, because that's another way of doing it. But a Cabinet system that we have is such that every Mi nister thinks he's equal to every other Mini ster, and there you create both competition and empire building between Min isters, but also between ministerial staffs.

I say that with full awareness that that's stepping on toes, but nevertheless, there are bueaucratic competitive ideas that people acquire, power struggles. All of it can affect the more advanced approach to how you deal with problems such as we're discussing. Now I too, feel that there's a concern about how you're going to split this up. When I look at Regional Personal Services and see the whole gamut of family 2079 problems being covered there, and then being told that it may be split as to responsi bili ty, but not as to physical location, I am really concerned.

You know, discounting the people involved that I know - I'm talking about Deputy Mini sters - whom I know and in whom I have confidence and I don't believe they are empire build ers, nevertheless, another set of Deputy Min isters and staff of two departments, both responsible for the del ivery of a very similar service could create more problems, not only the redund ancy th at might take pl ace, but the destsruction of a system which I think is important. I would caution the Min ister to be awfully careful. I don't know whether he meant it, or if it slipped out.

He said, "The Mi nister of Health said he would like to take back the health matters", and they'r e di scussing it. But it shoul dn't be a question of whether he wants to take it back or not, because the minute I would hear a Min ister say that - and I speak now with some slight arrogance of saying that - if I heard a Min ister say that I would switch the Mini ster immediately to the other department from whom he wants to take the power or the responsi bil ity, and say, "Now what do you think? Do you still want to give it up, rather than take it? ", because there is competition right in every Cabinet.

This approach I believe, is the right approach, and I'm going to assume that until you change it, that you're going to maintain it and I hope you won't change it, but if you do, you'll hear about it. Coming back to my example, I am now assuming that if the system is working as the Min ister thinks it is wor king, that as of this moment, there is a vocational rehabilitation officer working with that fam ily and work ing along all the aspects of budgeting, welfare needs, vocational rehabilitation and any health needs they have. I don't want to test it, Mr. Chairman, but I suspect that hasn't happened.

Mind you, it's only about two weeks since I raised it. I don't know how long it takes. But what bothers me is, I think they're still working under Social Security Services. I may be wrong, and a few phone calls will tell me, but that's not important. The important thing is, what are you gearing your system to? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, if the Honourable Member for St. Johns would, after the Committee, give us the information of the individual involved, we'll follow it up to see at which status that particular case is in. MR. CHERNIACK: That case may solve itself.

I want to know from the Mini ster, what is the instruction that permeates the system when these cases arise? Who is responsible to see to it that they are referred to that one central worker? Is it automatic, or does it need some special ind ication or somebody to trigger a problem, or is it automatically done? I'm not sure.

I've looked at the staff, the SMYs there. lt seems to me there's a substantial reduction in the one field where I thought this applied and that is under Social Security Services, Social Security Field Operations, there is a substantial reduction in personnel as I read it and now I want to know, is there sufficient staff to look after the needs I'm describing and am I right that it's in that department where I would expect it? I see that Regional Personal Services has a much bigger staff and a growth in staff but I'm still looking at Social Security Field Operations where I think my people are.

That's what worries me.

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, there hasn't been a reduction. What has happened if the Honourable Member for St. Johns looks at the staff man years that we gave him and if he turns to Page 3, you'll will find that th.e . . . MR. CHERNIACK: My pages aren't numbered. MR. MINAKER: If you take your staple at the front - sorry. MR. CHERNIACK: That's much better. MR. MINAKER: That the 27.5 that are shown transferred wit hin the department s ha ve been trans ferr ed.

They were Emp loyment Services components in that Social Security Field Operations and were trans ferred down to the Emplo yment Services under Rehabil itative Services which show as 26. Now where the 1. 5 went to, I'd have to get that information. MR. CHERNIACK: All right. MR. MINAKER: But at the present time our regional system is a multi-discipli nary system and it would depend in many ways on what situation the client was in. If it's one of income needs immediately, obviously the worker would refer them to the income security porti on.

If the person happened to be physically disabled, they migh t end up with the Society for Crippled Childr en and Adults in their Emplo yment Services tha t they ha ve in that particular area. So it depends on what the circu mstances surrounding the individual are, where they are dir ected and who dir ects them. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, that's what I pose is the problem. In this case, the example I've given you, which is a real example, it's not a figment of anybody's imagination. Where do they go? Do they go to one or another or another?

Because you say it's a multi-discipline, I'd like to think that there is one person to whom they relate only. That's the important thing to me and that person has not only the knowledge and experience and skill but also the clout to say to some other person in whatever field they are needed, you've got to take this family in hand for this or another purpose. So clout may be even more im portant than the job or the training itself. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, they can go to either seven regional offices or they can go to four income security offices that we have. lt depends on where they head first and there they would be dir ected accord ingly to the proper . . . MR. CHERNIACK: They they di rected to a person who has the experience, skill and clout to monitor their program in all aspects, is that correct? MR. MINAKER: The only other thing, Mr. Chairman, is we don't force any service on any individual that comes to us. it's up to them whether they want to accept it but we would di rect them to an area where they could be helped. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Chairman, here is a problem as it came to me. A phone call on, I think it was the fifth of the month from somebody who said, I have spent all the money I received on the first of the month. I have no money and my financial adviser, if that's the term for the worker that they were relating to, says I can't have any more. He says, what do 1 do? All right, that problem was money but I don't think that was a problem at all.

The problem was how to handle money and the problem was that this couple, age 23 and age 25, have made up their minds that they will never be productive so I think the problem is also vocational rehabilitation. That doesn't mean getting physically better so they can do work, it means finding the kind of work they could do. I'll bet this very government can use people who have the kinds of disability they have which are physical and I gather in both cases related to posture and spine and things like that but that voice tha t came to me over the telephone was knowledgeable, intelligent, loud and strong.

I could just visualize a job right there, there may be other things, I don't know. So it's not a question of forcing them to take the service. I think it does reach that stage.

Rather than force them to starve which is what they phoned me about saying we spent all our money, we have no more and we can't get any more; that's a compuls ory dictation from government. 1 think they should be told we want you also to go to this vocational rehabilita tive officer and we want you to have another check with probably the health people to see what your capabilities are and give them both the encouragement and the requirement that they do something about trying to relate to their budgeting needs and to their vocational possi bil ities.

That's what I'm getting at, not that they can't be forced, I think that they can be dir ected. So I come back to it. Do you want the name and you will find out wherer they are at and maybe I'll find out for myself first and then give you the name if I feel it's necessary? The reason I wouldn't want to give you the name is I wouldn't them to get special service that is better than that which the people who don't know how to phone their ML A get.

I often feel badly about people who, if they know how to reach an MLA, will get the service they need and if they're not sophis ticated enough to know their ML A, they may flounder and I'd like to think that there is a dir ection. I'd sure love to see a dir ection from the Mini ster to all workers in the field; you are required to ascertain the various pr obl ems for each case and to see to it tha t somebody is responsible to follow up all those problems. I'd love to see a bulletin like that and you've got it I'l l be very happy and congratulate you.

If you don't have it, maybe you will have it in a week or so and then show it to me. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, I would hope the honourable member would give us the name of the individual involved so we can see what has happened up to date at this present time, so we can have the full information on both sides of the story to see what in fact has unfolded. I'd be in terested in knowing not after the fact that the Member for St. Johns has brought it to our attention but once we know we can now trace back what has happened over the past two weeks that he refers to from the department's point of view.

But at the present time we are only hearing from what has happened to the 2080

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 individual from his point of view, so that would be our main objective at this point in time of knowing the name of the individual. MR. CHERNIACK: In a couple of days. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(bX 1) - pass - the Member for St. Bon iface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, just before we leave that, I'd like to give some advice. The Min ister can do what he wants with it but apparently they've been talking about the division and it takes a long time between the two departments.

I think it would have been much better, clearer and easier, if there had to be a division that one Min ister would take the institution. For instance, the one Min ister would take all the Manitoba Health Services Commission, the ins ured programs, Med icare, Ho spitaliz ation, Personal Care Home and these kinds of things and leave the rest because they have to overlap.

There are so many things and then, well, it says it here, Com mun ity He alth and Social Services in the community and leave the Mini ster there - that if anything, something should be transferred to your department in the field and the other Mini ster should take care ... and there's plenty, there's a lot of money being spent there. lt might be a little easier but they would have to worry about the hospitals, the personal care homes, everthing - all the Manitoba Health Services Commission, Pharmacare Program, any of these.

If they bring in, I think you 've mentioned eyeglasses and that kind of thing, that should go in there. And the service in the community which is the coming thing more and more, could stay with one Min ister then you wo uldn't ha ve this duplication. I think it would make a lot of sense. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(bX 1) - pass; 3.(bX2) - pass; 3.(cX 1) The Member for Transcona. MR. WILSON PARASI UK: I see a fairly large increase here and the Min ister in his statement on Page 5 said that you will be asked to appro ve increased rates for homemakers and increased rates to purchase services from the Victorian Order of Nurses.

Can the Min ister ind icate why we're getting a $3 million increase in this particular item? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, the main increase is relative. An increase in pay rates for employees paid through the Home Care payroll as appr oved this year and an inc rease in rates for services purchased from the VON and Community Therapy Services and the Home Orderly Services. Also, an in crease in the number of persons receiving the services and an increase in the units of services needed to maintain persons with increasing care needs at home.

I might point out that the total number of receiving home care this past year ha s been some 16 ,97 1 as compared to 15 ,592 in the previous year so there has been a considerable in crease in the care caseloads. We feel that might be basically levelling off at this point in time. The average monthly caseload at any one time as of December 31s t was 9,208 as compared to 8, 14 9 last year. So these are the basic kind of in creases we're having. MR. PARASIUK: How many homemakers would you have in an average month? 2081 MR.

MINAKER: At the present time we have 1, 682 homemakers as compared to 1, 635 in the previous year. MR. PARASIUK: That's the figures you had. When I first looked at this I thought there might be some crisis developing in Home Care. In previous years and this is dr awn from last year's Est ima tes di scussion - in the previous year, the year ending 19 80, you had 1, 560 homemakers per month and you jumped from 1, 560 to 1, 635 homemakers per month which is an increase of 75 on average. This year you're going from 1, 635 to 1, 682 which is an increase of 50 on average.

But last year you only had 11 percent increase in funding for this item. You went from $7.96 million to $8.85 million to all intents and purpo ses rounding it off. This year you're going from $8.85 million to $11. 79 million; an increase of 33 percent in one year for Home Care. If you say that part of that's accounted for by increase in pay rates, I assume that there were increases in pay rates for these people for the year previous. So what we're finding I think is that all the statements made by my colleagues, the Member for St. Bonif ace and the Member for Seven Oaks in the past, actually are coming true.

They said that this is a program that is being squeezed, that the impact of the freeze on nursing home construction will put tremendous pressures on this program, and that the past squeezes and cutbacks in the Home Care Program would lead to a whole set of bottlenecks which would ultimately lead to either a tremendous reduction in service or an explosion in costs, and tha t was an ine fficient way of budg eting and establishing estimates over a three- or four-year period. From what we see here this would appear to be the case.

We have a 33 percent incr ease in funding for Home Care and if that's needed to meet need we don't dis agree with that, in fact, we've been saying that need should be met continuously. But what we're finding in this particular year, the year ending March 19 82, which is the Estimates year, is that all of a sudden past restraint has been thrown to the wind and the government is able to find blobs of money here, there and everywhere, for hospital spending, for home care spending, for personal care spending, and I think this is a very cynical approach to meeting need.

We had the Mi nister's colleague, the Min ister of Health say that people have to be prepared to be overworked and un derpa id, those were past statements, and now coming up to what probably is an election year we're finding that they can get a lot of increases and that's something that I think the Min ister hasn't explained clearly. Why is it that last year we only had an 11 percent increase from the year before, and this year we're having a very sign ificant increase of 33 percent?

If it's done to meet need we have no objection, but as I said in the past comments of my colleagues have predicted this type of thing taking place if the government reduced the quality of care in the past. Now either the quality of care in the past wasn't sufficient and that's why a 33 percent inc rease is needed and if that's the case we say it's overdue but we applaud it. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, at the time we put these Estimates together the Budget for last year

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 was overspent in the program. We have provided a 10 percent increase this year for antici pated over­ expen di ture at tha t time and also a worklo ad incr ease of 5 percent to come up with this· figure, $11. 5 milli<;>n approxima tely. MR. PARASIUK: Well what was the actual expenditure last year? MR. MINAKER: I don't have the exact figure at the present time but the information I've got from Peter is that at the time we put these Estimates together was approxima tely $1. 4 million. MR. PARASIUK: 1. 4 million over 8.848. MR.

MINAKER: And there was an al lowance of appr oxima tely a 10 percent and a 5 percent increase, giving 11 .5 figure. So that's what accounts for the jump in the amount. We restrict the program because we feel like the honourable members do, that it is a good program, and it appears that our senior citizens want this type of a program. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, let's make no mistake about this. We're not chastising anybody for these Estimates. We'll gladly pass this.

What we are saying that last year and the year before, especially the year before, the two previous years, we said that this government was tightening the regulations on this and we were sure that wasn't the case. We've said that there should be more people, we said that then and they have to be ready for more because it would take a little while until all the freeze on personal care homes and all the other freezes would catch up and that is an example. That is an example, that's what my colleague is saying.

We were said no, ... and I could never believe that and it was said, I think it was last year, that we had reached the plateau. There were only so many people on home care and that has proven that now with these Estimates, and I'm pleased, because this is a lot cheaper program than a lot of other programs and then it helps people stay at home. lt is a good program. lt's a lot of money. But I mean, if you didn't have that, what would you have? There are some people, no doubt, that if you didn't ha ve this program you would have to build many many more personal care beds. I think that this is one of the factors.

And then another thing that we are pleased to see is that there is going to be an increase for the staff, also a larger increase, Because one of the answers, well we have trouble, when they couldn't, that's what the people were getting, well we can't get the staff. lt was di fficult, now mind you, it's never easy to get that kind of staff. What they would like, some of them, is get the same patient for ever and ever, if he needs it or not, and you know, there is some of that.

But I mean, the people that are really interested, it is going to be difficult and more of them would need the money so we're very pleased to vote this, because this is a good program. We're proud of it, but these are the kind of programs, this is what we're trying to say. We want you, we don't want to just crow and say you are wrong. We want you to, at least once in a while admit that when you got in power in 1977 and said, boy, this is not a good ad min istration and thi s is thr owi ng mone y at programs now.

You see you tighten it, you let people go, now you're hiring people and you're spending more money and you're catching up. And it's not easy when you deal with these people. So again, you know, we can't harp on that too much. My friend, my colleague made the point, I made it earlier, but this was a concern of us and we're quite satisfied that this has been . . . I want to ask the Mini ste r another, di scuss something with the Minister. I'm sure the Minister must have been asked this question. A lot of people, relatives, want to take care of people at home. They want to go on the home program.

In other words they want to be paid. That was something that I never liked when I was the Minister because I figured if he ever opened that up there is no end to it, but I'm starting to see that it has some validity not to pay, maybe if we took another approach and I wonder what the Mini ster thinks about that? In certain areas if we said, all right, that service, in other words we would pay for the service.

The service would not be, you're hiring somebody, does this person need this kind of care and if the parents, if the relatives would take him, it might be easier and would give you another, you'd have to be very very careful and I would suggest if you do that you're starting some kind of a pi lot project. But some people, you see, some people, for instance, would gladly stay home ins tead of working, they can't afford it, so you bring somebody in to do this work and they would be satisfied to look after their own father and mother and so on, if they had some help.

And there must be, it's going to be very difficult and, you know, you can't rush into it but I think that this should be looked at. I think it will give you other sources of volunteers, they're volunteers, although they are paid up to a certain point. The patient would probably get better care, would be better, because you know, it's not just to make sure that they eat.

In time, a lot of these people are kind of lonesome and it would help if some relatives would do it providing we don't start sayi ng, well okay, you know, this society now is going to start saying that you're going to pay for anything that you do for your relatives. Then the people want to get paid to take care of their kids, and their wives and so -(l nterjection)­ What are you laughing for? No, I think I've made my point and I don't imagine the Min ister has any answer now but may be he'd like to di scuss this and see what he thinks of it because I'm sure he has been asked the same thing many times. MR.

MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, I can di scuss it with my colle ague, the Mini ster of He alt h, as the Honourable Member from St. Bonif ace has indi cated, it's a very gray area on when you select relatives to provide this service and to compensate them in some manner and it is a difficult one to deal with but one that we will look at because there seems to be some merit to what the Honourable Memb er suggests.

The question is to define when in fact the need is there for the family rather than staying at home to look after the parent that they have to go out to work to meet their needs of income and that's where the big question mark comes. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, in an area, if we didn't go that far at times the people might need a littl e help. Maybe they could work part-time or 2082

I Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 some thing and that would save mone y and everybody would be more satisfied, you know. But now it's cut and dried and it was in our time because I certainly was afraid of it. lt's cut and dried to your relatives, no. You know, you're not going to start that because we were afraid of what might happen and that if you change society, that all of a sudden everybody had to be paid for anything that they did. But this way some people are serious, are sincere, they are not trying to be rich.

They won't get rich on that kind of thing but they would like to do a little bit but they just need a little bit and unfortunately and it's very difficult, you have rules and you have laws and sometimes that's all. You know, it's never gray; it's always black and white, either you do this yes, but that's not allowed and sometimes in the middle if there was more, if we had the chance to have a little more flexibility the programs would be better, it would be easier and it would be a lot cheaper too. So that probably should be the area they should look at. MR. CH AIRMAN: (3)(c) - the Mem ber for Transcona. MR.

PARASIUK: Yes, I'd like to add a dimension to the point raised by my colleague, the Member for St. Boniface. There are parents who have childr en who require ongoing care because of in the past, polio or other long -term ill nesses like that. In some of these instances these are single parents, who really are caught in the position of not being able to go out to work, looking after the child, being put on social assistance and living out their lives on welfare in their own mind. Now maybe there is some advantage to us because of the CAP - Canadian Assistance Program - in terms of 50-50 cost sharing.

But I wish ther e would be some way in whic h they wouldn't be seen as people on social assistance as opposed to people who are in fact providing a type of care that would have to be provided by the home care program. I think it adds a lot to their sense of worth and sense of dignity if they could do that. I have some personal experience with one family where that in fact occurred, where the mother looked after her child who had polio. She was a single parent and she basically was the woman down the street on welfare, for all of her life.

And yet she did a far better job than a home care worker and home care workers do good work, but she did a far better job than any combination of home care workers could ever hope to accomplish.

And I guess some people understood the situation and knew what she was going through and knew what the daughter was going through but at the same time there was still this notion that she was the woman on welfare down the street and I wish there was some way in which that particular problem, especially with respect to dependent children, if there was going to be any pilot attempt, could be looked at in terms of a person's self-worth and estimation of dignity. MR. DESJARDINS: May I add, Mr. Chairman, that reminded me.

I had an example of that. lt might not be exactly the same thing but it's the same problem of if you had a person, an adult I guess, but a retarded person, who got a job and, you know, the job, he was getting paid not very much, and he walked all over the pl ace. He del ivered for 2083 somebody, but he was at work. All the time he was very conscientious, but he was very limited in what he could do, so he was getting the very minimum, I don't know if there was a way to get less than minimum wages, I think he was.

All of a sudden, the people that look at the rules, this man isn't working, you're not entitled to this, you're not entitled to that, and so on, and he was worse off than if he had stayed at home. I don't remember all the details but that's one of the examples. Now the main thing is, it's not the money, it's not that he's producing so much, but what it does for a person like that of having a job. He really thought that was something, that he had a bit of spending money. Mind you, he probably spent all his money on the shoes that he was wearing out, running all over the place and so on.

But those are the areas, if there was a way, and that's very difficult to arriv e at that, because you have to make rules. But if there was a way, or even if there was a special fund for people like this in this department - I'm not talking about all departments - if there was some kind of an advisory board and if there was a special fund for any case like that, the Min ister would ha ve the di scret ion un der the recommendation of an advisory board to look at things like this and to help things and in the long run to maybe spend less money. A little bit of flexibility.

Ha ve the rule s, you need them, but provide something where there's flexibility, that a case like I mentioned and my friend mentioned, to go to the Minis ter and say, "Here ", and somebody would look at it and say, "Yes, maybe we can do something". I think it would be a humane way of looking at it. I think in the long run, it would make a lot of people much better off, in fact, you might even save money. MR. PARASIUK: I'd like to get back to the del ivery of home care for a minute, to explore one area where I've come across some particular problems in del ivery.

This concerns the situation where a person goes into the hospital because they hurt themselves; usually it's an elderly person. They might fall out of bed, hurt themselves, they go into hospital for a while, or they get ill with the flu or pneumonia or what have you and they go into hospital. The pressure in the hospital of course, is to get them out of hospital as quickly as possible, and they're sent home.

Often they're sent home somewhat disoriented, and they're told that they can leave the hospital, and some of them don't want to leave the hospital, because they feel somewhat more secure in the hospital, but they're told that if you leave the hospital, you go home and there will be home care there. They get into the cab, go home, and there ain't any home care and at that stage they get panicky. Now somewhere there seems to be a bit of a breakdown there. I've not come across breakdowns when a person is living at home. They apply for home care, they're panelled, they get the home care.

There usually isn't any breakdown in communication then, it's part of an orderly process. People usually in those situations are patient enough to wait through that process of panelling. But it's when a person is in the hospital and is sent home, that they run into this situation. Somehow there seems to be some balls dropped between the hospital whic h might be in one

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 particular region and the area in which the person li ves, which cou ld be in another region. I'm wondering whether in fact that's just an isolated case because I've had it happen to me a number of times now. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to cover another point and make my annual speech and my pitch for something I think is quite appropriate, and I'm talking about enriched senior citizens' homes. lt seems that we're not moving fast enough in that direction. I say it here, because it is some form of home care.

We had a meeting at their request, some of the members of our caucus met with the - what do you call them, the Council of Seniors - or something - we didn't bring it up, they brought it up themselves, and that was one of the main topics. You see, the people, especially those types of people, want to stay in their homes; they want to be independent. it's a heck of a lot better to keep them in their homes in every sense. They enjoy life better, they're human beings, providing they have certain things, providing they know that if they need care in the hospital, they can go.

You have to educate and the medical profession have to edu cate themselves, and they're trying. They're moving in that direction, because it's always said, and even doctors used to say, "Wel l, it's a lot more glamour ous lookin g after a young, good­ looking girl than looking after some old people ". lt's hard and the hospitals don't want to them, because they say, "Oh, God, if we get them here, we'll never be able to get them out ". it's a hassle to get them out, especially if there's no personal care home, and so on. So it is hard to get people like that.

On the other hand they figure, "Well, I won't get in ", they panic and they put in an application for a personal care home. They don't really want to go to a personal care home, but they're getting ready; they hear that it's so hard. Now whenever we have new sen ior citizens' homes, if we provided for that, maybe an extra little room, where if it's big enough, there could be a nurse in attendance all the time. That's not very much, and maybe some kind of an orderly that can help these people.

At one time, when we started this Home Care Program, I never understood that and I suggested that it should be changed, and it was changed. But at one time, people in those homes would not get home care. People who just move into a senior citizen 's home, they're very happy, and they want to show their suite, and everything is fine. The relatives, the family of these people are happy; mom and dad are happy, and it's home, it's not an institution. But all of a sudden, there's more calls, and they can't feed themselves and they have trouble doing certain things.

They're not bad enough to go in a personal care home yet. but it is their home. lt would be a lot cheaper because they're concentrated in that area. You could have a nurse or something on call or on duty, you cou ld have more of those facilities like on Smith, where there's a cafeteria. At least it might take care of their breakfast, but they could go and have a meal fairly cheap. I think we could subsid ize that instead of - it's a different level of government - subsidizing to the tune of $3 million, a restaurant on Parliament Hill in Ottawa for people that are getting around $50,000 and so on, or more.

I think we certainly could do that, I think it's well appropria te here because it's a form of home care, it is organized home care in an area, and that's another piece in this overall care that we give these people. They would stay there longer, so therefore they would occupy maybe a bed in the hospital or surely a bed in a personal care home later. They need a little bit of help. it's a bit like what we were talking about before. lt's all or nothing. You graduate here. Okay, well we've gone. We've started programs.

We've been the envy of other countries, and here in Manitoba we've been the envy of other provinces. This is the thing. Now, somebody will say, "Well, hey, there's a limit. With inflation and so on, we've got to cut down ". This is not expensive. You spend money to save money, because there's no choice. If they can't take care of themselves and make their meals and that little bit of help that they have, what's the next step? You're not going to abandon them. You're not going to let them die. You'll have to find a place in a personal care home. Then they're in an institution. They are no longer at home.

We said and you are saying the same thing, we want to keep the people in their homes as long as possible. Just a little bit of help, especially when you have these large senior citizens' homes, there's many people there, you have a nurse, it wouldn't cost you that much, that's not the end of the world. Maybe an orderly or whatever, a nurse could get to a doctor fast and maybe even have some home care workers doing certain things, maybe changing bulbs and that kind of thing, the kind of person that would give certain services to these kinds of people. Now we all give lip service to this.

We started, that is somet hing we were going to go at with a vengeance and you know, with the restraint, there was no time for a new program, but I wonder now. Apparently we were told that there's no problem now, there's no reason for restraint any more. Everything is set. The Budget is all set. Nobody owes any money. This might be the time to look at it. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, I guess there's sort of a general resistance to start to build health care into residences like senior citizen apartments.

I think to locate a nurse or an orderly there, then the concern might be that there would be demands for more nurses and orderlies, and then they would develop into some level of personal care home. Maybe we're going about it in a different direction, in tha t we have incr eased the elde rly da y care programs at personal care homes, where citizens can go to the facility to receive day care. Or we will provide home care to any senior citizen facility, where we deliver the service there, rather than retain the person on staff within the home.

So we are doing it to some degree, but we resisted the idea of putting somebody on staff right there in the senior citizen apartment or home. MR. DESJARDINS: No, Mr. Chairman, you're not doing it at all. Those are other programs, very good programs. You have a day care for the elderly that the Mi nister was referring to, I belie ve; this is very good. That is something else, and most of those people that you have day care for the elderly, maybe that's changed, where people that were living not in a senior citizen home, but with other people in a 2084

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 home. The reason for that, there's many. First of all, it's to give them an outing, and then organized form of recreation. Some of them will go a little further and give them a bath, because they're living with relatives, with a daughter or somebody that can't move them around, they wouldn't have any of that. Then during that time, it gives also the people that they're living with, will also have a chance to do a bit of shopp ing . Wha t do you call that, respit e treatment? Okay. Some of them will even have beds. Somebody will go away on a holida y and keep them for a little while.

That is a very good program. lt's just like a jig saw puzzle and you need all the pieces. I don't want to knock that program. That's a very good program. Most of the people in the area go once a week. If there's not too many demands they might go twice a week. But what about the other days? lt is not the same need. I'm talking about the people who are in the personal care. All right, forget the nurses if you don't want to start that. Give them a cafeteria. Provide a place where they could go down for their meals; they won't have to cook.

Some of them - now it wouldn't have to be in all the homes - you could have different degrees of dif ferent needs of senior citizen homes, bvt it is a step. Right now, you have a home and then you have a senior citizen home. What's the next step? Okay. Either a funeral dir ector, or they go to a personal care home. I'm saying that if you have an enriched senior citizen home, the advantage is they're still in their home. it is not an institution. The cost is a lot cheaper. They're paying for it, the service that they're getting there. They have subsid ized housing I think, but they still pay something,

whereas if they're not in there, they're going to go to the personal care home. You have to build more personal care homes. You have a larger demand. Or you might say, "Okay, we'll treat that like a home. When the person is sleeping, they'll read a book ". You think that's cheaper? You think, "So what if there's a demand of the nurses?" If there's a nurse part-time, or if it's a big place and there's enough people that are sick, so if you have one nurse for about 12 0 people, that's not expensive; a hell of a lot cheaper than building one bed of a personal care home. But the services are not necessarily nursing.

I think they should have a nurse on call. That'll save a call to a doctor in many instances. It'll get people to help them take the dr ugs in stead of going to every drug store and having their own little drug store in their suite. Then you will have a homemaker who will help them with - you have Meals On Wheels now. lt would be a lot cheaper if there was in certain areas, if you could do it and there was a big enough group that they have a cafeteria. On Smith, doesn't that work well? Hasn't it got a cafeteria? The Min ister I think, misunde rstood. He sa id, "Well, if we want to in troduce new health care.

" Maybe I shouldn't have said nurse. Let's leave it at home care, some help.

An enriched senior citizens' home where somebody that'll help them, not necessarily do it all because these people have to be active - you can't just do everything for them - that's not what I'm suggesting, but help them do little thing s that they can't, that'll be the difference that they could still stay there and probably the most important would be a place where they can have 2085 their meals - some kind of a cafeteria where they can have their meals because they no long er can cook and they're not eating well, they're worried, they are going down, the family are worried - they're goi ng to start making applica tion for a personal care home.

So the programs that you have are good ones. I congratulate you on those but they are not replacing this at all. The only thing that you're going to have, you go from that and when you can't do it you're going to go to a personal care home. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(c)( 1) - pass; 3.(c)(2) - pass ­ the Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, now we have the list in front of us. I think that's Age and Opportunity Centre, Brandon Civic Seniors, Meals on Wheels and new senior centres, those are the ones, eh? Were there any others that have been discontinued under this last year?

Well there's one new one, new senior centres - that's a new program this year. Am I on the right ... MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, we've incr eased our funding by 13 percent to Age and Opportunity this year and we will be increasing our funding to the Brandon Civic Senior Citizen from 22 on to 24.3. In addition we incr eased the Home Welfare Association Meals on Wheels from 28,000 to 30,500. The senior centres that we're talking about is new funding for new senior centres in rural areas. We are now getting requests from different locations. MR. DESJARDINS: Is that kind of a day care which you were talking about? MR.

MINAKER: No it will be basically dr op-in centres similar to the Age and Opportunity Centres. MR. DESJARDINS: Oh, for the well elderly. MR. MINAKER: Yes, right, this will be for the new centres outside rural Ma ni toba. We've allo tted $30,000 for that, not assigned to any particular centres. MR. DESJARDINS: That's very go od, but my question was, are there any others that were there last year and that are not there this year? They had three last year, those first three and now you have the fourth one, right? MR. MINAKER: Right. We've added the $30,000. MR. DESJARDINS: Okay, that's all I wanted to know. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 3.(c)(2) - pass; 3.(d) - pass. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, then is that the ... yes, that's the next one that I have on that list eh? Again the same questions, were there any that you've discontinued this year? There's one new one, the Thompson Crisis Centre that you mentioned before. That was there - well I don't think it's a new one but ... MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, the Thompson Crisis Centre was funded through a grant last year for the

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 first time, a special grant when the request came in and now we have it shown in this year's Budget at 49.2. MR. DESJARDINS: And there's none they had to discontinue? MR. MINAKER: Not that I'm aware of other than at the present time we have in d icated to the Four Nation Confederacy that when we receive word from the Provincial Aud itor that their acc ounting procedures are in order and they have control of their accou nting procedu res then we will be providing them with the grant that they normally receive from us. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, in other words you're holding back on that one? MR. MINAKER: Until we receive . MR. DESJARDINS: Oh yes, well that's something else. The money is there, it's just that you want to make sure that it's well spent. But there is nobody else under this that were funded last year that aren't this year for any reason? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, I can read them off to the honourable member if you want to tick them off. MR. DESJARDINS: No, I have them. MR. MINAKER: Oh, have you got them all . . . No they're identical as far as I'm aware of. We haven't dropped any.

When I looked down the 19 80-81 they match up with what's there for 1981- 82. MR. DESJARDINS: All right, my last question, the volunteer ... MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry, the only other one that would be out of here now was that last year I bel ieve the Noon and After School grants were ind icated under there I think at that time $240,000.00. That now has been lumped into the Day Care Program. MR. DESJARDINS: The Volunt eer Centre of Winnip eg - you have a reduction of $1 3,000.00. What is the reason for that? Is that because you're doing more in other fields or what? MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, it's my understanding that was a three-year program. In the initial years they needed more funding and it was a three-year program that was being reduced. MR. DESJARDINS: Kind of a start-up grant. MR. MINAKER: Yes, start-up grants and it was reduced this year. That was made clear to the Volu nteer Centre at that time. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(c)(2) - pass; 3.(d) - pass.

Be it resolved . . . Just before I do this I maybe should clear up something. If we look on the centre of the page 3.(a)(

b) and (c). Now those have no figures on either the extreme right or the extreme left so I officially didn't pass that and I think that was correct not to have - okay. Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exce eding $3 1 ,887,2 00 for Communit y Services and Corrections - pass. 4.(a) - pass - the Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Somewhere I have on this same list of the external agencies, I have one under Child Care Institutions for $6,675,000 - that's the one with Sir Hugh John and so on. Where do I find that?

I'm sure it's under 4. here - it's under Child and Family Services, but where? -(Interje ction)- MR. DESJARDINS: 4.(c). Oh, it's part of that $24 million. MR. MINAKER: Yes. MR. DE SJARDINS: And the $24 mil lion is Maintenance; is composed of what is done by the department and what you are commissioning people to do for you which are these four here - four institutions, right? MR. MINAKER: That is correct, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIR MAN: 4.(a) - the Mem ber for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Oh excuse me, I'm on 4.(c), so pass it. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(a) - pass - the Member for Transcona. MR.

PARASIUK: This is a fairly large item here, Child and Family Services. A number of things come to mind very quickly. First, there's been a lot of play in the media about the whole question of children still being sold over the border. I don't know if the government's investigating that whole question. Is there any truth to some of these statements that we still have some type of black market in babies with respect to adoption south of the border - illegal adoptions? And if that's the case, well first I think it's important to determine whether in fact there's any truth to that rumour or not.

That's the key thing to begin with. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, the subject matter or the particular individual in question is presently being investigated by the Attorney-General's Department in coordination with our department. MR. PARASIUK: There's one case being investigated? MR. MINAKER: That is the only that we are aware of at this time and it was drawn to our attention by Peter Warren. MR. PARASIUK: So that one is being investigated and that's the only one that you've had brought to your attention now.

Have there been others brought to your attention in the past few years in this regard or is this something that just came out of the blue? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, this just came out of the blue and we have no reason to belie ve that there 2086

I Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 are other situations simila r to this existing in Manitoba at the present time. MR. PARASIUK: So this case is being investigated right now and you don't have anything specific to report on it. The other one major matter here and I guess I'll just raise it right now - the whole question of the Child Welfare to Treaty Indians - both on reserves and off reserves and there's been a lot of dispute on this particular item and deba te on it. What's the present status of this item? MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, at the present time the Tripar tite Sub-Comm ittee on Indian Child Welfare have been meeting I guess over the past year and are into relatively final stages of an agreement where the Native people would look after their own child ren on reserves. There had been indications from the federal department that they would provide the funding for this particular care. To date the money has not been committed by the Federal Government. We have not seen the agreement that I think has been generally agreed upon by all three parties.

The phase would be that they would bring the agreement to each party that's involved. They would bring it to our go vernment for our Cabi net to review the proposed agreement. Sim ilarly it would go to the Federal Go vernment for their review of the agre ement and simila rly to the Four Nation Confederacy. I did have a promise from the Honourable Min ister Munr oe when I was in Ottawa on December 8th or 9th I bel ieve it was of la st year, tha t he was committed to sign an agreement by March 31s t of this year. I don't know whether that commitment will be met or not.

I have also written to him on that particular subject confirming what he had said verbally to us at that Min ister's meeting. The Tripartite Sub-Comm ittee I belie ve has been progressing quite well and it's just a matter now for the Federal Government to come forward that they are prepared to fund the particular program. MR. PARASIUK: Ju st so I can get a clear underst anding of thi s, does thi s mean that the recommenda tion is that child welfare would be provided on reserves by the bands themselves? They would hire, fire, train the people, admini ster that whole program? MR. MINAKER: That is correct, Mr.

Chairman, or by tribal councils that they would have this authority. There are finite details which I have not seen in this proposed agreement but basically what you say would be parts of the agreement. At one time the di scussion was that we would provide training for their particular staff. MR. PARASIUK: We have a mechanism through the Legislature for the public monitoring, the provision of child welfare services generall y throughout the province. What type of monitoring provision would there be with respect to the deli very of this type of program on reserves?

Would that just be an internal thing done through the tribal councils, through the bands? Would the Federal Government monitor it, would the Provincial Government monitor it, or was it just a complete transfer of responsibility over to the 2087 band or tribal council authorities with a sort block grant of funding and that's it? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, under

Section 7, The Child Welfare Act, the Min ister has the authority to establish child welfare committees where Chil dren Aid Societies do not exist and that would be the particular piece of the legislation that would be used. They would be monitored in the same way as we monitor Childr en's Aid Societies at the present time. MR. PARASIUK: What is the situation now and is there any change prop osed with respect to the provision of child welfare services to Treaty Indian childr en off reserves? MR.

MINAKER: My understanding is that 60 percent of our facilities are now servicing reservations in co­ operation with some of the tribal councils. On other situations it's where the chief may call us in or where a doctor might refer us to some child abuser or whatever. MR.

PARASIUK: What I'm asking, are child and family services to Treaty Indian people who aren't on the reserves but come into Win nipeg - they either come into Winnip eg from northern or rural communities in Manitoba and there might be a touch of continuity there but where I think there might be no continuity whatsoever is when people are coming in from Ontario - Kenora and places up there where they're coming in. Who provides those types of services? Some of these people are fairly transient. The childr en are involved. Who picks that up?

Whose responsi bility is it to provide the service, first, and secondly, who picks up the cost? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, we provide the service. We don't let people die on the street or starve on the street. Then we trace back their residency and if we find that the family in question or the ind ividual in question has not been off the reser vation for at least one year, or they have supported themselves for at least one year, then we consider them a Treaty Indian and we bill back to the Federal Government - the same basic policy that existed for the past number of years. MR.

CHAIRMA N: 4.(a ) - the Memb er for Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: You mean the same policy of non­ payment. MR. MINAKER: We're doing the same thing you used to do. MR. PARASIUK: That's right. MR. MINAKER: We get at least 50 percent back under CAP. MR. PARASIUK: Now we've got an item here of $30 million which is larger than most departments, this particular appropriation; now it's going up to $34 million. This is larger than most departments as such and we're trying to expedite things in the Estimates process but at the same time this is a very large amount of money. Can we get an indication from the

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 government as to roughly spe aking, how many children would this $34 million expenditure relate to? I'm not looking for anything exact, I'm just looking for something that's a ball park figure. Are we talking about 2,000 child red or 3,000 children, or ... ? MR. MINAKER: At any one time, Mr. Chairman, the average number of chil dren in care each month at the month end would be in the order of approxi mately 3,000 or roughly 3,200. MR. DESJARDINS: That's with the different child . the Children's Aid Society and the Institutions. MR.

MINAKER: That would include all the regional areas that do not have Children Aid Societies as well as Chil dren Aid Societies, and the Jewish Child and Family Services. MR. PA�ASIUK: Okay, for the year then, if you're doing that on a monthly basis, a lot of these would be repeats but in terms of sort of the accumulated caseload for the year, would it be fair to say 5,000? MR. MINAKER: I guess, Mr. Chairman, whether or not you include famil ies tha t migh t be under supervision that have their childr en at home. MR. PARASIUK: Even that, what's the magnitude of effort? How many people are we talking about here? MR.

MINAKER: Mr . Chairman, anywhere in the order of approxima tely 7,500 to 7,800, it varies. MR. PARASIUK: I'm just trying to get some idea of what 's actually being spent here then on a per person basis. I'm going to even round that off to 8,0 00 and then we'r e start ing to talk about something in the order of really $4,000 per person as a type of expenditure in this area, you know, on a very rough ball park basis, we're talking about $4,000 per person. Now, that would, I guess be for some in stances ins titutionali zation, maintenance, external agencies, so $4,000 strikes me as being a fairly high amount.

I wonder what would a social assistant payment, say if a single person was on social assistant for the year, an adult, what would that person be paid for that year through social assistance? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, it wou ld be somewhere in the order of about $5,000.00. it would depend on where they rented the facility and other items. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(a) - pass; 4.(b) - pass; 4.(c) - pass; 4.(d) - the Member for St. Bon iface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, the only question I want to ask that the reason why Knowles Centre has had a bit of a reduction, not a large reduction but are there less case there, the caseload dropped or what? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, the reason for that is that last year we had in there $10 0,000 in there for that psychiatric facility that Knowles had ind icated that they were prepared to look at and to develop and that did not come about last year and we do have, I think, a small amount of money this year, that we hope will be instituted this year.

Knowles had requested that it be dela yed for at least a year because they wanted to straighten out other situations at the school. MR. DESJARDINS: The new program that didn't start. MR. MINAKER: The new program that didn't start. So that's the reason for the $1 00,000.00. We do have a proportion to mount in there for this year . MR. CHAIRMAN: 4(c) - pass; 4(d) - pass. The Member for St. Bonif ace. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, under (

d) that's a very important thing, that's on the Children's Aid Society and the Jewish Child and Family Service and so on. Now those are all an increase. Is that for an incr ease in caseload or is it just an incr ease in cost in staff and so on mostly and . . . MR. MINAKER: Mr . Chairman, tha t's basically staffing cost and what we have is that the Childr en's Aid Society of Eastern Manitoba, we have three new SMYs and in the Children's Aid Society of Winn ipeg ther e are seven new SMYs and $1 50,000 for incr eased rental costs. MR.

DESJARDINS: The incr ease in staff man years, especially the Children's Aid Society of Winnipeg, is that to handle a bigger load or is that where they're overworked or more care .. ? MR. MINAKER: I think it's a combin ation of increased load and more complex load that we were advised because of the centre core in that particular problem. MR. DESJARDINS: There is something new here, Mr. Chairman, I'm talking about the Parent Aid Demonstration Project. I haven't the faintest idea what that is? Could you explain it? MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, that's a pr oject which is an outgrowth of developmental program activ itie s at the Health Scienc es Centr e which initia ted follow-up research in the early 1970s in the situations where childr en had been adm itted to hospital for trauma or unk nown origin. And from this activ ity a child abus e team or comm ittee was developed to assess, deter mine, and review treatment intervention in child abuse situations and members meet voluntarily at the Health Science Centre.

Now this basically is to deal with the parents and it is being funded 50 percent by the Federal Government and 50 percent by ourselves but we receive 50 percent back through CAP. So in actual fact they are putting up three-quarters of the program. And they're very high on it and they feel it has great potential and we're doing it as a pilot project. MR. DESJARDINS: The concern when this had kind of started, I think the thought at least, you know, before you came into power then it really got going after and the concern that I had, if I remember, now that you mention this, that this was del ivered but in 2088

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 the city and we were worried about the people of child abuse in the rural area. This was done, isn't that the one that was done by one, was that the Childr en's Aid Society that was one of the societies that was handling this program? I recall faintly there that the people were asked to do it for everybody but then it seems that the service wasn't provided for people in the rest of Manitoba. MR. MINAKER: Mr.

Chairman, other chil d-caring agencies have that program and not to the capacity that this is and this is an off-shoot of that program. it's a separate program from what you're describing. MR. DESJARDINS: The one I'm describing was last year and this is something new, or isn't that the same group? MR. MINAKER: I've been advised that this is a new part of that group. MR. DESJARDINS: You're incr easi ng, you'r e covering more people? Oh, well that's fine because that was our concern last year that some people were out of it. Okay, fine. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, so that there is no misunde rstanding.

This is a concentrated effort in the City of Winnip eg and this isn't available at the present time outside of the City of Winnipeg. MR. DESJARDINS: I think you've taken another step. I think at one time it was only the Child ren's Aid Society of Winnip eg at that, and now it's the next step and can the Mi nister see that this will be expanded and taking advantage of the expertise that we have with these areas because I understand Dr. Machray is one of the best and I feel that he's been wonderful.

Would he be available, will that team be available to at least advise other people in the rural area that aren't covered? MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, they are available to provide that service at the present time to do that and again we'll be evaluating this service and the program evaluation is being provided by social . . . MR. DESJARDINS: it's kind of a pilot project that you are progressing with? MR. MINAKER: Yes, and the program evaluation is being provided by So cial Planning Council of Winnip eg so we will be looking at that. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(d) - pass; 4.(e) - the Member from Transcona. MR.

PARASIUK: Yes, I just want to know why Seven Oaks Centre for Youth is broken out when you also ha ve institutions like Kn owles Centre, Marymound In corporated, Sir Hugh John Macdonald Hostel. MR. MINAKER: Mr. Chairman, it's a simple explanation. it's the only one that are civil servants. The other ones are agencies. These are actual civil servants of MGEA. (I nterjection)- Right, we run this one; when we split the child welfare away from Manitoba Youth Centre. 2089 MR. DESJARDINS: Isn't that the one that changed the name; what was that before? MR.

MINAKER: No, you're thinking of Doncaster Centre where we opened up and -(l nterjection)­ oh, this is the home for girls. This is where all the child welfare reception takes place in the City of Winnipeg. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(e)(1) - pass; 4.(e)(2) - pass.

Be it resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceed ing $34,0 85 ,10 0 for Community Services and Corrections - pass. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I just noticed that Henry just woke up. I wonder if it would be the right time to adjourn the . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee rise. SUPPL V - ENERGY AND MINES MR. CHAIRMAN, Abe. Kov nats (Radisson): This committee will come to order. I will di rect the honourable members attention to Page 54 of the Main Estimates, Department of Energy and Mines. Resolution No. 57, Clause 1, Administration, Item (a)

(2) Salaries - pass. The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: I wasn't sure whether the Mini ster had finished his statement. I know he was talking at 4:30, but so be it, he can probably carry on shortly at any rate, but I'm quite prepared to yield the floor to him if he wanted to carry on. I wanted to just merely comment about the figures just so that there'd be no confusion in the Mi nister's mind as to what I am referring to when I talk about the decline and the output of the mining ind ustry.

The data that I have used is the standard data compiled by the Conference Board in Canada using Statistics Canada data on the value added of the mining ind ustry. In other words, this is the standard procedure used in tabulating the real output of each indus try sector. If you don't use this particular method you get duplic ation, you start duplic ating the output of each ind ustry. So therefore, Mr. Chairman, I wanted it to be quite clear that the data we're using are the standard data that's published - I'm not talking about forecast informa tion, Mr.

Chairman, I'm talking about his torical inf ormation and it's ob tained in the Quarterly Provincial Forecast. They have the forecast for '81, but they also have the records for 19 79 and 19 80 and, of course, they published a historical supple ment to this report. The real do mestic product, as they refer to it, which is the value added estimate, does ind icate, I' ve checked the figures aga in, does ind icate a decline of 25 percent in annual average output of the mining indus try in Manitoba in the past three years compared to what occurred in 19 70 to 1977.

I would refer the Min ister, I'm sure he gets this report or can get it, to look at the February 1981 addi tion of the Quar terly Provi ncial Forecast Conference Board of Canada. On Page 53 it ind icates the numb ers, $83 million, this is 19 71 constant dollars, $83 million was the output for 1979, $93 million was the output for 1980, and then the

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 forecast, which I'm not making a big thing out of, is a slight decline, it's a 2 percent decline to $91 million. I want to also comment, Mr. Chairman, that I want to make it clear that I did not suggest that the mining ind ustry was above the output of the past three years, while we were in office because of some particular policies that we followed.

My point is that the output of the mining ind ustry in Canada and Ma nitoba is largely governed by international markets, by world markets, by world prices for metals and mine rals and I think the Member from lnkster made that point, and I repeat that is the most critical factor. So I reject any suggestion that new policies of this government have done something to turn around the industry. As I said, Mr. Chairman, the datas show a reduction in output, not any resurgence.

I might just relate to the introduction to this latest report of the Conference Board in Canada when they talk about what is going to be happening to the mining ind ustry as a whole in Canada this year. They state that a cutback of drilling operations is now widely expected. World markets for iron, copper, nickel and most other metals are weake nin g as ind ustrial activity stagnates in consuming nations. Then it goes on to talk about production of asbestos and structural materials closely tied to the pace of the construc tion, which is forecast to remain depressed in 19 81.

Overal l, the real domestic product of the mining industry is predicted to drop by over 3 percent this year. Now that is for Canada as a whole, but as I said they've ind icated a 2 percent drop for the Province of Manitoba. So, I say, Mr. Chairman, we are at the mercy of the international market for the base metals that we produce; namely copper, zinc and nickel and I think at the provincial level we can have some impact, but I think that impact tends to be marginal. The critical point that we would make also, Mr.

Chairman, is that the important thing is that we obtain for the people of this province the absolute greatest return from the non renewable resource. I think it's not just good enoug h to have people working; it's not good enough to have an output of the industry; it's most important that we look at the value that is accrued to the citizens of this province, and I know that the people of Manitoba want their governments, whatever party is in power, they want their governments to capture as much of that wealth as they can for the people of the province.

I also appreciate the fact that private investment needs an incentive and I appr eciate the fact that these investment dollars will come in if there is an abili ty to make profit; I un derstand that, we understand that on this side of the House. But at the same time to only be looking at rates of return and profit margins for the private sector is not good enough. We have to look at what kind of return that ind ustry will provide for the people of Manitoba which incidentally also get involved in putting a lot of inf rastructure in place.

I do not wish to be negative or pessimistic about any industry in Manitoba, Mr. Chairman. I would hope that in the years ahead we will have more mining activity than we have today. There is an opportunity to assist in the economic development of the pr ovi nce thr ough this one 2090 ind ustry sector, but I cannot accept blan ket statements that we've had a sudden resurgence in the past three years because of the policies of this particular government. This is what I reject.

I do not reject the mining ind ustry; I want to see it grow; the New Democratic Party wants to see it grow, but we also want to see a fair return back to the citizens of Manitoba through royalties, taxes, etc. I again remind all of us that probably the critical factor here will remain the value of these metals on world markets and that's some thin g that neither the present Mini ster, nor past Mini sters of Mines have had any control over. MR. CHAIRMAN: (2) - pass - the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. HOWARD PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr.

Chairman, I want to deal with the issue of Trout Lake and the mine at Trout Lake, and the transaction that took place. Can the Minister advise me what is Huds on Bay Mining and Smelting earning for its $28 million expenditure? Does this amount guarantee that no further other moneys will be required of the original partners, Granges, or the Province of Manitoba? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. DONALD W. CRAIK (Riel): Mr. Chairman, well, first of all I'm not sure I heard clearly what the Leader of the Opposition was asking? Maybe I'd better get that clear.

But secondly, this was all before the committee on Economic Devel opment when the Manitoba Mineral Resources was involved or will be involved in presenting its report, and since this is a Manitoba Mineral Resources undertaking I think the time to pursue that line of questioning is when they're before the committee. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, I would hope that the Min ister would be co-operative in the committee, the question is very simple. What was received on the part of Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting for its $28 million investment? What was received by way of interest?

Did it receive a working in terest in the mine? If so, what percentage of working interest? I'm sure the Min ister has that information. MR. CRAIK: Well, Mr. Chairman, that has been presented on a number of occasions. I think the HB M and S is 44 percent, Manitoba Min eral Resources is 27 and Gr anges gr oup are the remainder, whatever that number works out to. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, then can the Min ister advise whether Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting will be charg ing the other two partners a fee for processing the ore in the mill? MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Chairman, I'm not going to follow this up very much further, but certainly, yes, there is a work ing arrangemen t. lt's a joint vent ure arrangement between the three parties and there is a fee paid, of course, for the processing of the ore built into HBM and S participation in this, but I don't have all the details of the agreement before me and I think that when Mr. Koffman and his group are before the commit tee, that's the time to be presenting it.

I Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 MR. PAWLEY: Is the Min ister prepared to table that agreement at this point? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Chairman, I would think so. I'm not even aware of the fact that it wasn't tabled and I would think that it's the sort of document that should be, but again we should arrange to do that before the committee. If the Leader of the Opp osition wishes to pursue it by way of Order for Return or Address for Papers we'd certainly have a look at it. MR.

PAWLEY: Can the Mini ster advise whether or not Granges received any cash payment or any other consideration for its sale of interest to Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting? MR. CRAIK: No, I'm not aware, Mr. Chairman, and again if there are further question I think it would be very valuable if the Leader of the Opposition would put them on the record and then we'll make sure that when the committee does convene and the report is presented that the information would be available. MR. PAWLEY: I would be prepared to do that.

If the Minis ter doesn't have the information now he could either receive it dealing with his Salary or the informtion could be provided during the committee. Can the Min ister then also accept as notice what the government received insofar as its consideration in respect to its sale of interest? Is the retained interest of Granges or the government a carried interest to the point of production or are they to be faced with some other obli gation, fina nc ial or otherwise, somewhere else down the road? Mr.

Chairman, I'd like the Min ister to ind icate who acted as consultant to the government in respect to the transaction that they did work out with Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting? MR. CRAIK: I can answer the one question, the last question, since it does pertain to the government, Mr. Chairman, and that is with regard to the consu ltant. The gov ernment had no consultant retained on this transaction. That doesn't mean that Manitoba Mineral Resources did not have someone retained. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Chairman, I would ask the Mini ster, in view of the fact that his government has been in power since '77, if the Min ister can advise of any new mine that has been opened up during the Mini ster's term in government since '77? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Chairman, it would be my intention in this procedure to take the questions and develop the information as they go along rather than jumping up and down and answering them one at a time. If the members opposite, including the Leader of the Opposition of course, wish to follow that I'll get as much information as I can for them. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Chairman, there are a few points I would like to also address to the Min ister pertaining to Flyer arising from the quest ion period this afternoon. I gather from what the Min ister indicated this afternoon that he consi ders the matter pertaining to the hiring of the new president to be a matter of responsibility for the board and I couldn't 2091 dispute the Min ister's claim in this respect. However, the Fi rst Min ister received a letter on February 5 ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, are we talking about Flyer Industries? Did I hear Flyer Ind ustries? MR. PAWLEY: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: Under this Energy and Mi nes?

MR. PAWLEY: Well, Mr. Chairman, I understood we were still on 1. (a). Have we moved from 1. (a)? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minis ter. MR. CRAIK: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. This comes under the Ma nitoba Dev elopm ent Corporation, which appears before the Economic Development Committee of Cabinet; it doesn't come under Energy and Min es. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, in fact this afternoon the Member for ln kster dealt at some length on the question of Flyer and this is the Min ister that is re sponsible for the Ma ni toba Dev elopment Corporation.

I believe you were in the Chair, you di dn't call the Member for ln kster to order thi s afternoon pertaining to Flyer and we have to look to this Mi nister, surely, Mr . Chairman, to deal with questions of thi s nature. I don't kno w why the Mi nister, if he doesn't have the answers to the questions that I wish to present to him, that is a matter that he could accept as notice and could return to us du ring discussion of the Min ister's Salary. MR.

CHAIRMAN: To the honourable members, I just can't see any association or connection with Flyer Ind ustries un der the dep artment tha t we are discussing and that's my only point of order. The Honourable Minister. MR. CRAIK: A point of order again, the same one. I have no hesitation in dealing with that matter; I would welcome it, but I think in the inter est of following some kinds of rules or procedure of the House that topic ought to be raised under some appropriate title that we're examining under the committee stage and this is not it.

The Leader of the Opposition, who has dealt with these things many times before, kno ws ther e are appropr iate opportunities in this House, let alone the committee, to deal with this but Energy and Mi nes is not Flyer Indu stries. MR. CHAIRMAN: I would strongly recommend to the honourable members tha t the item under di scussion is Energy and Mi nes and it's the Admi nistration of Energy and Mine s, and Flyer Ind ustries to my way of thinking, even though I might have allo wed it this afternoon in error, I don't think it really comes under di scussion at this point. The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. D.

JAMES WALDING: Mr. Chairman, to the same point of order if it's still before the committee.

Tuesday, 24 March, 1981 I believe it is true that the present Minister is the Min ister who reports to the Manitoba Development Corporation. I don't see the Manitoba Development Corporation as having any appropriation by the Legislature for it. lt then becomes a question of where does this Min ister answer questions for that particular responsibility that it has. lt may not come under Admini stration or Admin istrative Services of Energy or Mi nes but, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to hope that there will be some opportun ity within this department, even if it's the Mini ster's Salary at the end, where the Min ister can be questioned on this particular subject. I cite, if I may, another example and that is the Attorney-General's responsibility for the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission, which does not appear under the Department of the Attorney-General as you are aware, because there is no money expended by the House for the Commission.

What has been our general practice is that the item is left until the Min ister's Salary, the very last item, at which time the Min ister has been quite willing to answer any questions that members might bring up. If you wish to rule tha t any questio ns on MD C should be add ressed to this Min ister under his salary as the last item, I'm sure that would be acceptable, but what my Leader is attempting to do, I belie ve, is to put forward a few questions that migh t well be answered under the Minister's Salary. MR.

CHAIRMAN: To the honourable members, I don't think that I could take it on myself to rule that MDC is to be discus sed under this particular item under any circu mstances. I would hope that the mention of the Attorney-General and the Manitoba Liquor Commission doesn't lead to some further debate on that particular subject, and it wasn't meant to be humorous. The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. WALDING: Just as a matter of clarification on your ruling.

Are you saying that we may not ask questions on the Manitoba Development Corporation under any part of Energy and Min es or only under this particular line under Energy and Min es? MR. CHAIRMAN: I can't see, to the honourable members I can't see under any circumstances where I could allo w dis cussion on the MD C, Flyer Ind ustries, under the subje ct that is under di scussion. MR. WALDING: Mr.

Chairman, I know that we're not suppo sed to di rect questions to the Chair, but I put it to you that consideration must be given to allow the Opposition the opportunity to ask questions of the Mini ster on his respon sibili ty for the Ma nitoba Development Corporation. Since I do not see the MDC anywhere else in the book, it would appear the only opportunity we have to question the Min ister on that particular responsibility would be under this item and specifically under his Salary. MR.

CHAIRMAN: To the honourable members, I've got to comp letely agree that MD C ha s to be discussed somewhere rather than limiting any kind of discussion, but I can't allow it under this particular subject. The Honourable Min ister of Recreation, Spor ts and Fitness. HON.

ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (la Verendrye): On the same point of order, I would just like to point out that unlike the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission, which does not report to any committee of the Legislature, the Manitoba Development Corporation reports to the Economic Development Committee and the members have had ample opportunity in the committee, as a matter of fact that report has been passed, to question the Min ister as well as the Chairman of the Board with regards to the whole operations of Flyer and everything else. The member opposite have passed that report.

I'm not arguing that maybe somewhere in the Estimates during the Mini ster's Salary that can be di scussed, but surely not under the item that we're on right now. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, I think with all due respect tha t what we are dealing with is the Mini ster's Salary. Part of that -(I nterjection)- Mr. Chairman, we are dealing with 1(a) . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. I'm going to have to make some rulings and if I can't hear what the question is or the subject under discussion it's going to be even more difficult for me to make rulings.

The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, though we are dealing with the general subject matter under the Estimates of Energy and Min es, we are dea ling with the Min ister's Salary $20,600, we're dealing with 1(

a) is my understanding. If I'm incorr ect then I would beg to be corrected, but my understanding is that we are still dealing with 1(a) -(I nterjection)- 1(a)(2), which is Salaries and we're dealing with the Admin istration. Is it being suggested that none of the Salary, none of the Admini stration costs relating to this particular item is un dertaken. (I nterjecti on)- Well, Mr . Chairman, I wou ld app reciate if we ha d an opportunity to deal with matter as properly as we should be expected to be able to deal with it. Much