Manitoba Hansard — 19 April 1979 (Sitting 43B, 31st Legislature, 3rd Session)

31-3-43b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

.. " • ... ISSN 0542-5492 Third Session - Thirty-First Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS 28 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Harry E. Graham Speaker VOL XXVII No. 438 8:00 P.M. Thursday, April 19, 1979 Office of the Queen's Printer for the Province of Manitoba

·' Time 8:00 p.m. LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, April 19, 1979 SUPPLY - AGRICULTURE MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee come to order. Continuation of Resolution 11, Item 6.(cX 1 ). The Member for St . George. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to rise on a point of privilege. When we left Committee at 4:30, Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Agriculture indicated that it was my statements that had indicated that we wished to nationalize the grain companies. Mr.

Chairman, I made no such statements; I spoke about the railroad beds, and my statements on the railroad beds stand; but I made no statements with respect to the grain companies, whatsoever. I wish that to be clear on the record, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: Fine. (c)(1)-pass - the Member for Ste . Rose. MR. ADAM: The Minister , before we got up for the dinner hour, was having us believe that he would not want to see any of the rails continue, or something to that effect, where there was losses on branch lines.

I would say that most of the . branch lines, or perhaps all of the branch lines that were ever constructed were never intended to show a profit , were never able to show a profit, in my opinion . And he would have us believe that because they are unable to make a profit now, that that would be a logical reason to discontinue the lines. I would say most emphatically that, as far as I'm concerned , most of the branch lines were never intended to show a profit. If they could it was fine , if not , I'm sure that most of the branch lines were not intended to show a profit, and that is the reason, Mr .

Chairman, that the subsidies were paid to the railroad companies . By 1905, which goes beyond the Minister 's time and my time as well , and I believe most of the people in this room , by 1905 more than 55 million acres of land had been so pledged to the railroad for the very reason -(Interjection)- well, it has to do .. . we are talking about the cost of transporting grain and the loss of branch lines.

And the Minister said, before supper, that he didn't think that maybe we should continue branch lines if they were showing a loss, and I don't think that that's a valid argument , because they were never intended to show a profit in the first place. The proof right here is that 55 million acres by 1905 had already been transferred over to the railways . So I just can 't accept the arguement today that now these branch lines are not showing a profit and we have to do away with all of them, because they were never intended to do that in the first place .

They were constructed to provide the service , to open up the country , to bring in people to come and live in those areas and pioneer the lands. That was the intent of expanding the railroads to all areas of the province . Now one of the things that I think that the PRAC recommendations are saying is that ... Another th ing the Minister said before supper is that he wanted to provide good service . And by increasing the rates and showing a profit to the railroads that somehow we are going to get a better service . The Statutes of Canada today , it's under

Section 106 and

Section 259, that the railways are legally bound to provide service to wherever they have lines. Sections 262 and 266 as well, make the railways legally responsible for providing rolling stock, motive power and rail capacity to move grain to meet sales opportunity and commitment. This is by the law of the land that the railways are legally bound to do that. But what has happened is that we have had a succession of governments that have allowed the railways to slough it off and not to live up to their responsibilities. So I want to put that on the record, Mr.

Chairman, that we should not, that the taxpayer should not having to repair boxcars . We should not have to do that because the railways have taken depreciation on these boxcars. They have been subsidized on those lines that they have lost money on, and they have not used that money to keep those lines up to the original standards of 177,000 pounds. They have allowed the railways just to fade away. As far as I am concerned, when I see that in my constituency we are going to lose two branch lines from Winnipegosis to Ste. Rose, I have to object most vociferously as I can and to criticize 2831

Thursday, April 19, 1979 the government for their stand at Prince Rupert for not speaking up in defense of the farmer here insofar as rail abandonment is concerned. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Gladstone . MR. FERGUSON: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . Well , we on this side definitely do have to take issue with some of the statements that have been made by our honourable friends across the way. First would be that we are not doing anything about the retention of our branch lines . I think that we possibly have as good a program as has been created .

It certa inly is one, and is a program , and that is quite a lot more than we can say for our friends across the way when they were in government. . I think that the first thing that has to be done , of course , is a retent ion committee has to be formed and that normally is done by the local people. Then , in co- operation with governmen t, whatever assistance can be suppl ied is and we go from there . Most of the lines up for abandonme nt now, will be due in 1980. We do have a couple of years to work on them and conseque ntly, I think that in many cases we will be able to retain many of these branch lines.

It's been quite a free wheeling business of rail line abandonment. The railways are getting a lot of the blame and the elevators haven 't been getting , I don 't think , quite as much as they should be getting . In many cases , they felt that if they could close their plants , why , there would have to be an amalgamation or a central delivery point. We're seeing the tip of the icebe rg now , and the fact that in many elevators in my area last year , on towards the end of the crop year , there were line-ups of 40 and 50 trucks , and people were delive ring about two loads of grain a day.

Well, this certainly can 't be tolerated and I think a concentrated effort has got to be made on all sides to do something to alleviate this situation . We're quite aware also that in our areas, that we are going to have to develop cash flow . Many of our young farmers and anyone else that's in the business are bor rowing up to any amount of money, and they 're paying a very high interest on it.

And when you star t taking 13 percent off the top and probably a few other extra expenses thrown in that weren 't figured in to start with , why, we find that farming becomes a very hazardous and dangerous occupation to become involved in. And even the President of Manitoba Pool Elevators , Mr. Chairma n, a statement in today 's paper that the farm leader says that agricultural organizations should initiate negotiation and changes to Crowsnest Pass rates before a settlement is forced upon us by government. The Member for Ste .

Rose stated that under federal statutes the railways were supposedly tied in to providing a service to the public, and that of course, they are attempting to do. But , Mr. Chairman , I would like to point out that if any operation is operating a business that there is not sufficient income to warrant expansion of it, or keeping the rolling trade up to a standard , the service is not going to be supplied . And certainly , we can criticize , we can do whatever we like , but the y can say, well , this is all we can do and therefore we are not getting the services.

I would also like to point out tha t we are paying between $30 and $35 million a year on demurrage charges.

I think I would far sooner see this money , i f it's possib le at all, go into - I'm not saying to do away with the Crowsnest Pass rates , that definitely is not going to come about , I'm not supporting that position at all - but I am supporting a position that that money might have been far better applied to up-dating the inventory of our railroads possibly in whatever manner we have to do to ensure that we, at least , are showing that we are willing to participate in upgrading the thing, trying to get the thing up to a standard and supplying the service to us.

Now, we're committed at the present time to spend $90 million out of Canadian Wheat Board funds to buy boxcars . I can't say that I'm overwhelmed with this approach . I don 't agree with it at all particularly, but here again it is at least showing that we're willing to put our money where our mouth is and try to develop something to service our own industry and I think possibly it was a very good move and agree that we're running into a position now whereby there is a demand all over the North American continent for rolling stock.

If that order possibly hadn 't been placed when it was, it might have been a year or eighteen months waiting period to get the show on the road . Another thing that we're going to have to take a look at in grain transportation and marketing, I think it is in a north-south trade whereby trucking is going to become quite an important factor in the movement of our oil seeds and our sunflowers, our rape , flax , etc ., into possibly Duluth and Minneapolis markets for processing. I think also that we should at this time take a pretty good long hard look at what's going to happen in the producer-car arena.

We find that in 1974-75, there were 96 producer cars applied for; 1978-79 there were 2,816. Now this is basically .03 to 1.3 percent of the total railway fleet. But I think this also shows something , Mr. Chairman , that hasn't really received as much attention as it should , and that is the fact that if our Wheat Board was doing the job that they are supposed to be doing , the services of producer cars would not be required 2832 ...

.. , • • Thursday, April 19, 1979 because there 's no problem at all getting a producer car, making a direct sale to an eastern feeder and completing the transaction , etc.

Now the Wheat Board have done a considerable amount of complaining about the fact that we're plugging the lines and we're upsetting the orderly market , etc., etc ., etc ., but I find that in many cases our elevators find it much mo re profitable to become full and then make no effort whatever to move that product , whe reby someone that is doing their own merchandising and making their own deals is quite anxious to move a product and get the cash flow going. I think, Mr.

Chairman , this is about all I have to say at this time, but 1 do point out that if it wasn't for the oil seeds and the offboard grains to create a cash flow this year , agriculture would have been in a completely disastrous position because this is where the money is and 1 don 't really think that our Wheat Board is doing the job. I would hope that more meetings will follow the type that took place here in Winnipeg , the one that took place in Prince George , that we will be in a position to have more storage and more faci lities at Prince Rupert.

We're in a very unfortunate position that we do only really have one all-weather port at the present time and that is Vancouver , with the addition of Prince Rupert. I think that the potential is there and if we're going to captivate these markets and hold the ones we've got, we certainly have got to have co-operation from all forms of government and whatever other methods that have to be taken to ensure that we are going to deliver our produce I really believe that a start has been made .

All segments of the industry have met and talked, which is always a good th ing, and I think that we are on the right track and I think that our government has shown the leadership . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . I am pleased to hear the Member for Gladstone at least not supporting the Conservative policy of revaluating the Crowsnest rates, that he doesn 't support that policy by his statements today . -(I nte rjection )- So we don 't know , at least he doesn 't want them to go, so he doesn't support the review of them.

But he certainly, rather than attacking the root of the problem of making sure that the service is provided , he is prepared to attack the orderly market ing system of grain as being part of the root of the problem , that they are not doing the job. Well , Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Agricul tur e, when we left off at 4:30 ind icated that it was not thei r position to review the Crowsnes t rat es, that they were supporting the Crowsnest rate . Mr.

Chairman , the minister should recall tha t the other three western premiers were totally opposed to the posi tion of Man itoba, with respect to the r eview of the Crowsnest rates . All that one has to do is read the paper , Mr. Chairman . Well, Mr. Chairman , Alberta Prem ier, Peter Lougheed and I quote from the Winnipeg Tribune , March 27, " Peter Lougheed and B.C. Premier , Bill Bennett echoed Mr. Blakeney 's opposition to the proposed study of rates which were guaranteed in 1897 to the grain far mers in perpetuity by the federa l government ." Mr.

Chairman , the Premier of Saskatchewan indi cated and I quote , " The proposal by Man itoba disagrees with virtually every statement on the cro wra tes and grain transportation tha t Saskat chewan has ever issued ." Mr. Chairman , the Government of Manitoba , under this minister and the premier of this province certainly are prepared to place the interests of the railways ahead of the interests of the farmers of Man itoba . They are prepared to allow the review of the Crowsnest rates on the assumption that if · a better system follows , that they are prepared to give it up, Mr. Chairman .

That's what they have stated; that 's what the premier has stated ; that's what this minister has stated . Mr. Chairman , the min ister tried to paint a red herring , that I was prepared to nationalize everything in the hope that service would be improved . Mr. Chairman, I did indicate what our position was and I indicated again , that the roadbed should become a public utility right across this country, so that transportation would be a national responsibility and should be used as a tool for overcoming regional disparities . Mr.

Chairman, as well , the making of the roadbed and making the roadbed to be able to be used by both railways , we should , as a national policy, eliminate competition as the principal governing present as part of a national transportation pol icy. That the roadbed and the railways , we, in Canada, should use that policy as the basis of provid ing a service and that all the people of this country should contribute to that policy . Well , Mr. Chairman, you know, many areas in the transportation field are subsidized nationally by all taxpayers of this country .

We have the marine transport revenues, and I am told that they pay only 20 percent of the costs . In other words , the rates on marine transport only pay 20 percent of the costs of the services . If the Conservative policy of user-pay were to be instituted, the road transport revenues, which pay only 64 percent of the road costs , you know , they'd have to be increased immensely. Air transport revenues, which pay only about 31 percent of the cost, they 2833

Thursday, April 19, 1979 would have to be increased immensely. Mr. Chairman, rail transport revenues pay only 70 percent of the cost. If your policy of user-pay and the re-examination of the crowrates - and that's really the user-pay - your position is really, if they are examined , they should be increased and the railways should get their moneys on a competitive basis and they should be able to supply the service. Mr. Chairman, over the years we know that the railways have abandoned the principle of providing service .

We know in many rural communities that the railways have deliberately moved away from the hauling of goods, because they could make greater profits on the main lines and they were not interested in the business on the smaller lines.

And all that one has to look at. and I have several examples from my own area , in the community of Arborg , regularly a number of years ago , fuel was hauled into that community by the railways by the car ; today , today there isn't one car of fuel being hauled because the communities and the dealers in fuel cannot depend on the service provided by the railways when the fuel is to be delivered .

The quarries at Steep Rock, we find today , that there about a dozen semi-trailers knocking the heck out of No. 6 Highway , hauling crushed stone approximately 200 miles , making two trips a day, when there is a railway going right into that quarry, Mr . Chairman . It is a deliberate move, over the years by the railways to neglect the service to those communities and to those industries, thus indicating that because they are losing money on those branch lines , that they are not profitable , they're just neglecting the service.

And that is one of the reasons why they can show the losses , the huge losses that they show on the branch lines and it is really because of their neglect of service , Mr. Chairman . But this government , this government in its position to the Western Premiers' Conference , has certainly placed the producers of grain in this province at a very awkward position on the basis of their proposals . And I believe that they will examine , as they 've said , and they will agree , they will even agree with the statements that have been made by the President of Manitoba Pool.

Like the Member for Gladstone indicated , the President of Manitoba Pool has indicated that we should renegotiate the Crowsrates . Well, Mr. Chairman, the moment that you start indicating that you renegotiate you ::tre prepared to move somewhere . I ask this Minister of Agriculture , can the farmers of this province , can each farmer of this province afford, off his income today, $3,000 annually from the sale of grain the additional costs that he would have to pay if the Crowsrates were brought up to compensatory rates, because that's what would happen in the province of Manitoba . You are prepared to study it.

You indicated that we did nothing in terms of reviewing the costs that would be passed on to the farmers . Mr. Chairman , if it wasn 't for the Member for Lac du Bonnet pushing you into that position by asking you what stud ies you have done since you have taken office a year and a half ago , you would not have appointed , I believe you would not have appointed the investigation by the professor from the University of Manitoba to do that , Mr. Chairman.

That's where you have have stood on this issue , and I believe that the farmers of this province , and of western Canada , will certainly be the losers on the basis of the policy that you propose . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Highways . MR. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . Well Mr. Chairman, I can 't let the Honourable Member for St. George read into the records such inconsistencies as he has just done . When we speak about the railways, we have first of all a very fine example of both public and private interests at work in the transportation industry here in this country of Canada .

To accuse and to treat them both in the same light , you know , there's a basic contradiction . Is he saying on the one hand that the CNR as a public enterprise, owned and operated hopefully for the benefit of all Canadians , by Canadians, for Canadians, that it is oblivious to the needs of Canadians ?

I would expect that , of course , for him to make that charge to the CPR, but when he suggests that the CPR for the pecuniary interests of its shareholders is not interested in doing things that earn them a dollar , a dividend on their share , you know that's a basic inconsistency that the honourable member chooses to overlook .

And when he brings in such homilies as to why the CPR Railroad doesn 't deliver fuel any more in tanker carloads to such a fine community such as Arborg , the fact of the matter simply is that you have a competitive trucking industry that has in many instances very successfully challenged some of the more traditional modes of transportation in this country ; that you have the receivers of this commodity choosing to have a tanker truck come and roll up into their service lots and put the product right into their storage tanks on location , rather than having a duplication of that little trucking service , somebody pumping out of a tanker siding and then driving it up 2 or 3 miles or half a mile to the various service lots .

This is what 's happened . You know , I pass no particular 2834

. r Thursday, April 19, 1979 judgment about this. I pass no particular judgment as to whether it's right or wrong , but that 's what's been happening in the development of a more modern sophist icated transportation system . And by the way , a system with all its faults , that nonetheless moves goods and services pretty well across this country. There are anomalies , and grain being one of them , and the manner and the service afforded to farmers in the movement of grain is certainly one that this government and this Minister of Agriculture need take no back seat to.

In fact , if ever there was a Minister of Agriculture to be accorded a particular accolade , it was at his insistence - and by the way, Mr. Chairman , I think it's fair to put on the record that it was the Minister of Agriculture that insisted on the January meeting . Sure ed by it's okay the Premier of this province , but it was the Minister of Agriculture that initiated and made this possible . The Honourable Member for St. George can talk all he wanted about whether it's desirable to have trucks hauling crushed rock down No. 6 Highway or not.

The fact of the matter is, as the Minister responsible for the Motor Vehicle Branch , you know , these trucks don 't run for nothing. I charge them a pretty hefty fee in terms of licensing them to haul any given number of thousand pounds over a given piece of road . I have to accept the professional advice that my engineers give me that a load is capable of being carried on a highway that we've constructed. We put, from time to time, limitations as we are now putting limitations on our roads, because we think damage is being done and that is not in the public interest.

But I suppose it points up the really considerable gulf in the distance between my honourable friend from St. George and myself and this government when he leaves the impression that economies aside, personal preference or convenience of trade aside , he wishes to have a government agency decide how goods should be delivered , on what basis, whether there are dollars to be saved or not, and just refuses to acknowledge what's happening in the development of a transportation system within the private sector . Mr. Chairman, I happen to agree with part of his concern with respect to railways .

I believe we should nationalize the railbeds , and I believe that we should treat the railbeds, we should treat the railbeds in the same way as we treat the National Harbour 's Commission who provide and build the harbours and maintains them for all users , all shippers of grain by oceangoing or inner country boats.

I believe in the same sense that just as we in the public provide and build the major international air terminals, whether it's in Winnipeg or Mirabel or Dorval or Vancouver , and then charge the appropriate fees for CP or Air Canada or Lufthansa or SAS or whoever , Pan Am to come and use those facilit ies I think ther e could be a great deal of rationalization of the total utilization of the investment within the railbed , if in fact we move in this direct ion .

And I know the Minister in private conversation has had some discussions on th is matter and has a fair amount of interest in this matter but that is a whale of a difference from talking about the kind of overall governmental control that the Honourable Member for St. George is talking about. Well, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted the Honourable Member for St.

George to know that there was possibly a reason why the Esso dealer or the Co-op dealer in Arborg chose to phone Paul 's Trucking and have gasoline delivered to his yard rather than wait for it to come at a railway siding that he then has to find or keep and maintain a truck to transfer it that half mile from the railway siding into his facility . These are the kind of things that work themselves out so nicely and so economically in the private sector , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister . MR. DOWNEY: Just from one point for the committee 's clarification sake , Mr. Chairman , the Member for St.

George tried to leave the impress ion that the only reason we entered into any form of a study was because of pressure from the Member for Lac du Bonnet which is totally an absurd kind of a statement because we ente red into an agreement with the - (Interjection) - well , Mr . Chairman , we entered into an agreement last September before any discussion was ever taken place from the opposition .

Again I go back and say they had nothing on the record, there was nothing in the files to do with anything and all at once they felt there should be something, and because they asked us a question on it that we immediately jump to do it.

In fact , the records will show that that question was asked some time when this session started , so in fact we were well on the way to having some type of information, some research work done far in excess of when they thought they had made great headway , and again they had eight years to do it and it seems that now because they ask us a question they thought we really jump to do that. Mr. Chairman, I just want to clarify that for the committee. MR. CHAIRMAN: Member for St. Rose. MR. ADAM: Well, Mr. Chairman , the members of the government are debating some points that 2835

Thursday, April 19, 1979 need to be challenged and the Minister of Highways claims that the CPR has to be treated differently than the CNR and you know , I want to say to the Minister that this free enterprise entity the CPR has been taking subsidies from the Crown since the early 1900s and probably prior to that. And you know, what kind of free enterprise system is that? I wouldn 't let that statement go unchallenged because they have been taking money from the Crown and not spending it on the roads that they are losing money on.

They have been taking depreciation and subsidies on lines and the cars should have been repaired and up to scratch as they were intended. They should not be now saying that the Crown has to fix up these cars or repair them. But the main reason I wanted to speak at this time is because of the comments from the Member for Gladstone in which he states that the Wheat Board is not doing a good job . And he repeated that several times . I want to say that I believe the Wheat Board is doing an excellent job , particularly since they have to deal with the railroad that doesn 't move the grain .

They have been doing an excellent job. In 1977 - 1978 the railroads didn 't haul 2.9 million bushels of grain that had been committed and sold but never was transported to the terminal for export market. In addition to that, Mr. Chairman , they could have picked up another 3 million tonnes had the railroads been able to move that grain and the 2.9 million was not bushels , it was tonnes. So that 's a lot of grain. That is why the farmers had to pay $25 million worth of demurrage in 1977 - 1978. Now to say, well we're going to try to get the grain there and there 's no assurance . -(Interjections)- MR.

CHAIRMAN: Order please. Order please. The Honourable Member for Ste . Rose. MR. ADAM: We really appreciate members getting into the debate , Mr. Chairman . We hear what they have to say but the fact of the matter is that the Wheat Board has been doing a good job . It could have sold close to 6 million tonnes more and delivered it if the railways would have been able to move it. The railways , by law, they have to provide rolling stoc k, motor power , to get that grain to market , and they haven 't done it.

At the same time they are taking subsidies right and left from the Crown and they have allowed the tracks to deteriorate - and the road beds . There is nothing wrong with the road beds and I'm very happy the Minister of Highways is supporting our position that he would be willing to nationalize the road beds . I'm very happy to hear him . At least if he can convince the Minister of Agriculture to that way of thinking, maybe we'll get somewhere . -(Interjections)- MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Swan River . MR. DOUG GOURLAY (Swan River): Thank you , Mr. Chairman .

I would like to make some comments with respect to the comments made by the Member for St. George with respect to the fact that our Premier had requested a complete study , not only of the crowsnest rates , but grain handling and transportation in general. The crowsnest was only a very small part of it. I think that this was a very timely suggestion . The Member for St. George really questioned this and also said that the Premiers of Saskatchewan and Alberta and I believe , B. C. had objected to this.

I have just recently learned that both the Alberta and Saskatchewan governments have already got subsidies , just about finalized if they haven 't been finalized, to help producers move grain . And if they have already got programs in effect , this would indicate to me that they have already taken an evaluation of, not only the crowsnest rates, but the total transportation system . A MEMBER: It's already broken. MR. GOURLAY: So why wouldn 't why these province s want to join in with the Province of Manitoba to look at the complete study of the handling and movement of grain .

Certainly we, in the Province of Manitoba , cannot compete with any subsidy program that Alberta could offer the grain producers in Alberta or the grain producers in Saskatchewan . There 's no way that we can compete . When we get into a subsidy program with Saskatchewan and Alberta , we're going to get into that kind of a game . And why wouldn 't we, as three prairie provinces , take a look at this together? If further compensation has to be made , maybe this is what has to be done.

But I think at the same time , we also have to get a guarantee from the railways that we will get good service if we do put more money into it. Heavens knows , we're already subsidizing in many areas now whether we like it or not. There 's going to be more and more of this. So I think it was a very timely suggestion on the part of our Premier that we take a real good look at the movement of grain and the handling of grain at this time and especially the three prairie provinces should be part and parcel to any new programs that might be implemented involving further subsidies in grain transportation. 2836 --

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, I'm glad that the Member for Swan River , Sir, was prepared to raise the issue of the grain handling and transportation . I would have to agree with the Member for Swan River if the Premier at this conference had raised the issue of grain handling in terms of providing better service in terms of handling , but he raised it in one context only; in the context - and I will read the paragraph from his submission again, Mr. Chairman .

I'll read the paragraphs previous to that because I think it will give the Member for Swan River a clearer understanding of what the thrust of the Premier's of this province 's t argument wasAnd I quote from Page 9 and 10 of his document, and that is his statement, not my statement , Mr. Chairman : "I believe we have a clear understanding now of the key role, the cost revenue shortfall experienced by the railways plays in the inadequacies of our grain transportation system. There's been a growing awareness of the significance of this cost revenue deficit in recent months .

Discussions focusing on the needs for some form of compensatory rates are now being heard among producer and industry groups . The major questions still unresolved is - who should pay such compensatory rates assuming as the Snaveley Report finds there was agreement that they are required if we are to have a modern rail transportation system? There is agreement that the crowrate has allowed western agriculture to expand and prosper . It has permitted the farmer to stabilize a portion of the costs he faces. During the ups and downs of the agricultural cycle, the crowrate has remained constant.

Over the decades the western farmer has enjoyed the benefits of the crow and I maintain that in no way can the farmers of western Canada be expected to give up those benefits unless it can be demonstrated that a superior system will result. All of those benefits, as well as the detriments of statutory rates must be specifically ident ified so we know that we stand to gain and lose in any discussions of compensatory rates ." Unquote . Mr. Chairman, the Member -(Interjection)- . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, would you not care to read on? Maybe you'd like to read it all into the record. Maybe that should be done . MR.

URUSKI: Well, Mr. Chairman , if the Min ister wants to read further, by all means . When he takes the floor , he can certainly read on from the statement and continue to make his contribution . Well, Mr. Chairman , the Premier of this province did not talk about service . He talked specifically about compensatory rates and that the railways need revenue , that they are losing revenue , and one way to examine this , to overcome this revenue , was to look at the Crowsnest rates. That 's what he was saying .

And our position is, that in no way should the western producer be subjected to an increased cost in freights . He cannot now afford that cost . Little can he afford . . . and I ask this Minister whether he could tell us whether the producers of Manitoba , each producer could afford to pay $3,000 more a year in increased freight costs on the basis of the grain that. . . - (Interjection)- Well , Mr. Chairman , the Member for Minnedosa talks about a mythical figure . Let him . .. Mr. Chairman, the Saskatchewan figure is even higher and our figure probably is higher than that.

I'm using a very conservative figure, to put it mildly . -(Interjection)- Mr. Chairman , if the Minister of Agriculture of th is province has a figure . .. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. MR. URUSKI: . .. that is more accurate than mine, let him put it on the record . I challenge him to tell the producers of the province that it will not cost every producer more than $3,000 a year. Mr. Chairman , the producers require the transportation system but they cannot well afford to pay an additional $3,000 a year, at least per producer in terms of the increased costs that giving up the crowrate is going to do .

The Minister of Highways , the Member for Lakeside , who has conveniently left after he made his remarks , knew so much about the Community of Arborg, and indicated , well, that the railways - in his usual red herring form , brought out the matter , the issue that the local bulk dealers would have to employ another truck to pump the fuel from the railway to the storage tanks . He should know the Community of Arborg a little better . I am sure he's been there a number of times. The bulk stations of every major oil dealer are located adjacent to the railway.

There is no need to employ any other vehicles in the pumping of fuel from the cars to the railways . The Minister of Highways indicates that yes, he doesn 't mind the trucks using our roads and knocking the heck out of them , they pay enough licence fees , Mr . Chairman . What he conveniently forgets is that transportation by the railways is at least seventeen times as efficient than transportation by truck, that the use of our fossil fuels, the use of those fuels , and the cost of transporting by truck is so much more expensive than transporting by rail, Mr. Chairman, and the 2837

Thursday, April 19, 1979 efficiency of the specifics that I gave from the Community of Steep Rock is just in my mind with the railways being there, they do haul part of the time , but there still is about I believe , close to a dozen trucks trying to make two trips a day. That means an 800-mile , or close to an 800-mile trip per trucker a day hauling this crushed stone . to the, I believe, the foundries in Fort Whyte and other places in Winnipeg , which just doesn 't make sense in terms of the service that is provided . Mr.

Chairman , the Minister of Highways does acknowledge that the public does support and does subsidize ou.r roads , our marine transportation . He made note of our airports . It really does subsidize it, and at least he has a sense of indicating that a roadbed should become a public utility . But this Minister of Agriculture doesn't even want to even think about that, doesn 't want to make our railways the same public utility that we make of the airports, and we subsidize the airlines by providing them those airports, our roads , we subsidize all transportation by providing those roads .

We do not recoup enough revenues from our licence fees to pay for the construction of road s, I don 't believe, I don 't believe we do, Mr. Chairman , so that there is no doubt that this gov ernment and especially the Premier of this province, who, the Minister of Highways wants to give credit to the Minister of Agriculture for calling the meeting on transportation . I hope that they did resolve something and accomplished something by having that conference here.

But I really think that most issues that they discussed at the conference were being dealt with and being persued by earlier conferences and earlier agreements and it was really , as was stated , an upstaging of the Minister of Transportation. And if that 's not the case , let him tell me what was accomplished in addition to what was announced and talked about by all facets of the industry, some of whom were having a hard time to be here because of their annual meetings and the like. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister . MR. DOWNEY: Well , Mr.

Chairman, I go back again to say the purpose for the meeting that the Premier instigated, the meeting which was held in January because of the fact that the Wheat Board itself said there were some $350 ,000 (sic) in lost sales because of the inabi lity of the internal system to provide the grain for those markets; $350 million (sic) worth of sales that were in fact lost. And when the presentation was made to the western Premiers , which the Member for St.

George would like the people of Manitoba to believe that in fact it was our proposal to sit down and to jeopardize the position of the western farme rs on discussing statutory rates , it just goes to show you how much he is out of touch . There has been in fact indication from two major grain companies , presidents who are farmer organizations , who say exactly the same thing , that they do have to sit down and discuss the whole compensatory rate issue , with the whole thing brought into perspective .

The things that were accomplished by the January meeting was the commitment from the Premier of Alberta to supply funding for expansion of the Prince Rupert port, the interchange of cars between two railroads , which would supply the grain to that new port , the fact that there had to be more upgrading of rail cars , the older type cars , and just firmly convince the people of Manitoba, as far as the Premier of Manitoba is concerned , that he is interested in the well-being of the rural people and that the total people in Manitoba , because of the effect the agricultural economy has on the well-being of all.

And the Member for St. George cannot dispute that, particularly when we take the position that there would be no changes agreed to unless there can be truly demonstrated , a superior system to the entire community , the agriculture community . That, Mr. Chairman , speaks for itself, particularly when the Premier, the Premier of Saskatchewan agreed that there had to be a looking at. And let 's go back to that Premiers Meeting in Western Canada , which I was fortunate enough to be a part of.

They sat down as premiers coming out of that meeting, saying that there had to be committee put together to discuss a common position of Western Provinces, after in fact , we had a federal minister , who after May 22 we hope will have some kind of long-term range policy that will effectively move our product. And if the Member for St. George wants to discuss agriculture economics , you know, to bring him into the real world of what is taking place with farmers today in rural Manitoba. Let us look at the farmer who is sitting with possibly a

section of land. He's probably sitting with ... the average size of farms in Manitoba , are something like five to seven hundred acres , so we'll say that the average grain farmer probably has a six hundred acre base, of which would gross him a return of somewhere in the neighbourhood of $100 .00 an acre, which is $60 ,000 . Mr. Chairman, the interest on $60 ,000 worth of grain sitting in his granaries is $6,000 per year . It doesn 't take too much of an economist to figure out.

It doesn 't take too much of a young , or of any kind of an agricultural economist , whether he have all the degrees in the world, or whether he's the grass roots individual, that a man that is sitting with $60 ,000 worth of grain, sitting in his bins cost him $6,000 a year 2838

Thursday, April 19, 1979 in interest . What kind of a picture is he trying to paint us, because in Saskatchewan - a figure he's pulled out of the air because he doesn 't know , he didn 't have any studies done , we are having studies done so we know where we're at, we know where the farmers are at and we can speak to that.

Oh, we do know where we're at because it doesn't take much of an economist to figure out that if you have $60 ,000 worth of grain sitting in your bin , if there 's a market available to you sitting some place in another country , that that is $6,000 per year it is costing you to have that grain in storgge. On your farm , Mr. Chairman . And he's saying, well, the farmer is losing $3,000 because of some suggestions somebody 's making . In fact , what is really happening is costing him $6,000 , Mr. Chairman.

It is costing him $6,000 to sit with his grain year after year , and having to go to the bank - and I would take from the Member for St. George 's comments that he would far sooner see the young farmers of Manitoba pay high interest rates who are in the banking industry . He'd sooner support the banking industry; he would sooner support the banking industry with high interest . . . Mr. Chairman , can I have order , please. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, he would sooner support young farmers , people who are having to pay 13 and 14 percent operating money, who should have the money in their pocket today . They haven 't got that money in their pocket today, Mr. Chairman , it is sitting in the granary . It is sitting in the granary because of the inability of the grain handling and transportation system to get that grain to the markets . That , Mr. Chairman , is $6,000 a year that it's costing them at 10 percent , not to have their grain moved .

He's saying, because we want to discuss some change , it's going to cost them $3,000 , Well it would appear to me if you put those figures together, he would be to the benefit of $3,000 , not to the loss of $3,000 , when you figure, Mr. Chairman , the fact that he is probably sitting with $60,000 worth of grain, unable to be sold . And what is he doing , Mr. Chairman? He is growing crops and we are supporting that totally in our programs through the AgroMan Agreement. We are supporting him to produce crops such as grain corn , which in fact he can sell ; he doesn 't get a statutory rate for grain corn.

What about the sunflower crops? Is he getting that , Mr. Chairman? No. He has to pay the full tariff . -(lnterjection)- Mr. Chairman , he says, " do what Saskatchewan does ." So he expects that the province of Manitoba should further put a bandaid approach , and that 's what it is, Mr. Chairman , it is a bandaid approach . He would sooner support the big grain companies that want to build crushing facilities .

He wants us as a province to enter in paying subsidized rates for big companies to come in and crush oil seed in Manitoba and pay the subsidized rate , or the difference in the subsidized rate and the actual cost on processed goods in Manitoba? Mr. Chairman , you know you have to come right back to basic economics , and that's where the Member for St. George really has a hard time doing . In fact , we have to look at the total grain handling and transportation system , the total costs that farmers are incurring today . They , Mr. Chairman, do not want to have their heads buried in the sand .

They want to put their businesses on a sound business basis , and they want to get cash in their pockets. Because he's in the turkey business , Mr. Chairman , he should be the first one , he should be the first one in a livestock producing business to say, we want the same subsidy , we want the same subsidy , Mr. Chairman, for our raw turkey product going out of this province as the grain producer is getting. But he's not saying that , Mr. Chairman . He won 't come to grips with that . If, Mr.

Chairman , you 're going to subsidize the raw products out of this province, you have to subsize the total agriculture products at the same rate , to create equality . And if you don 't, Mr. Chairman , what you are in fact doing, what you are in fact doing in Manitoba and in western Canada today through the whole compensatory rate system , is exporting jobs , Mr. Chairman ; exporting jobs to Japan , you 're exporting jobs to all the countries , all the countries that probably don 't need those jobs , because they do have , i n fact , a real low rate of unemployment. But here we are , Mr.

Chairman, sitting , discussing , i n opposition , to a labour party , who feel that they are the great job creators, and they can come out and say, look, we want to support a program that builds a subsidy rate to export jobs out of Canada . That 's what he's saying , Mr. Chairman, in saying we want to continue on and not even look at it. Not even look at the benefits to Manitoba. Not look at the benefits to the livestock producers , which he knows very well all the history of that. Mr.

Chairman , I think if we totally take hold of the problem such as has been recommended by the Premier - in fact not to look at the compensatory rate as far as taking benefits away from tam farmers - let's go through it again. We have a study taking place, to really let us know as government, and the farmers of Manitoba , really where we are at. And we are not going to give up any advantages that farmers have, in fact we are going to at least identify what those advantages 2839

Thursday, April 19, 1979 truly are . We won't accept anything unless it's as good as what we have or better at this point. We've clearly stated it; it was stated at the Western Premiers' Conference . He, Mr.

Chairman, in fact his party, at the position that they 're taking at this point, would actually say that they support a program that would subsidize raw products such as rapeseed, where it should be processed right here in Manitoba, he would ship it out , where in fact if they processed that crop right here in the province, it would be job-creating , job-creating for far more people, but he can 't understand that. He says it's costing the farmers $3,000, o or it would cost the farmers $3,000 if any change were made. Mr.

Chairman, it's costing the farmers $3,000 in interest today because their product is not moving . It's costing them $6,000 if they're sitting with 60,000 bushels of grain . Because today, if you 're a farmer, when you go out to put a crop in this year , it is going to cost you a lot of money , at 13 percent interest. Let's look at it. But he doesn 't even want to look at that. He thinks we're sitting with farmers that are something , people that can't think for themselves. Mr.

Chairman , there is a feeling in the country that farmers are prepared to discuss the very things that we're talking about, the whole grain handling and transportation system . He, Mr. Chairman , will continue to bury his head in the sand and say that you can make more money with your grain sitting in the bins. At 13 percent interest. Well, we go to the Member for Ste.

Rose who goes back and says, well , you know , we've had this since 1905, I think we've totally taken the leadership that has to be taken , we're in complete harmony with grain companies that are totally representing a large majority of the farmers in western Canada . They , Mr. Chairman, are not burying their heads in the sand , they're coming to grips with the real world .

And we are not , in any way , jeopardizing the people of Manitoba , the farmers, in fact, what we are doing is prepared to work with them , to work with them , to come out , as far as they are concerned with a better , more efficient system of handling and transporting grain . That's the position we've taken, we'll support it totally , and I think that we've discussed this issue for several hours, we'll continue to debate it. Again , I don 't want to keep going back to saying that he didn 't have a study prepared, we all know that they didn't have a study prepared .

They didn 't have a study and they're actually proud of the fact they didn 't have it. MR. CHAIRMAN: (d)-pass - the Member for Virden. MR. McGREGOR: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I guess maybe most everyth ing has been said , but just, I know , as an active Chamber of Commerce member in my small community, we brought this question at different times to our dealers and ask , how come you 're not using the box cars and getting the tanker?

And they had a good answer , they were all bright beside the track, in the wintertime, it's 20, 30 below, a rail car came in, the dealer had to get out , hook up those pipes , do all the calculating, where if a highway tanker came in, he did all the work . And the local dealers just simply told us, there 's no way we're going to bring it in. And they didn't. I do think that transportation meeting here in January was a good one . It opened up a lot of things and areas that we, as ind ividuals didn't know . And I can refer to the Palliser Wheat Growers Convention last early January in Regina , where Mr.

Armstrong of the CNR stated where they could unload some 200 cars per day , and that particular morning he said there was in excess of 3,000 box cars loaded in the Vancouver area. And that would tell you , if not another box car entered B.C., they 'll be three solid weeks catching that ... And his main point was that the CNR really didn't need much more rolling stock , if indeed the turnaround time could be speeded up from 21 days, he believed it could be put down to 15 days . In other words , CNR could handle one-third more grain than they were .

He didn 't blame anyone , but I think it was definitely left that the terminals were certainly not pulling their weight , because he did say they could have some 600 box cars workable space , they could load 1,000 , have 1,000 , but there isn 't working space.

I personally liked the resolution that the United Grain Growers annual meeting last fall stating that, keep the present Crow Rate and rather than up the rate of the Crow Rate , have Ottawa subsidize the difference , rather than the complicated subsidy program out of Ottawa now, that if a branch line - and I can name one close to me that 's ready for abandonment , and what did they do there all last year? - Spread ballast along there, at the taxpayers ' expense .

This other way , if they have to pay another 20 cents a hundredweight, that would come , and that , to me, was one of the fairer , it was getting the railroads more money in a direct way that all of us would understand. So, I think that 's it, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Amateur Sports . MR. BANMAN: Thank you , Mr . Chairman. I think one of the things that has to be emphasized when we're talking about this , when 18 months ago this government took over and we started to 2840

Thursday, April 19, 1979 discuss different transportation problems within Man itoba and western Canad a, dealing with grain, dealing with the problems of secondary manufactur ing industries and food processors in the province , one of the first things that the Minister of Agriculture now and myself asked staff is, what effect , what impact would any changes in the Crow Rate have on the Man itoba growers.

The answer was a very clear and short one, " gentlemen , we don 't have any figures to be able to tell you what we're dea ling with ." So right now , what is happening is that the Minister of Agriculture, along with the Min ister in charge of the Transportation Secretariat , i s doing a study to see exactly what kind of an impact the Crow Rate has on the province of Manitoba. You know, we can sit here , we didn 't have any figure at all to relate to that particular problem. So I think that should be put on the record here. Saskatchewan has done elaborate studies on that , they know where they 're going, Mr.

Chairman . We had no idea. And I think that has to be laid on the table . We're doing some studies to find out exactly what impact the Crow is having on the province of Manitoba. So that 's No. 1. No. 2, in dealing with this whole problem, there has been developments in the last little while where both Saskatchewan and Alberta , if you talk specifically of the rapeseed industry , have been talking about subsidizing on the provincial level, the movement of certain commodities within that province . Manitoba , I thin k, is in the position of having to say that we cannot get into a transportation war with Alberta .

There 's just no way. If they want to start subsidizing the movement of rapeseed , I think what you 're talking about is something that Manitoba , who just does not have the financ ial resources like Alberta , the re is no way that we can start subsidizing the movement of different commodities on a provincial level like some of our richer cousins to the west can. And that 's a very , very simple way of approaching it. I think the approach that we've taken is a very rational one .

We're going to have to see exactly how Manitoba is going to be affected by that , and we have made it very clear that any systems that we will be looking at will not be implemented until we know exactly what benefit and what drawbacks the Crow has had upon our system as a whole . So to say that all kinds of things are happening when we really are presently trying to solve some of the serious problems that are developing in the transportation field , I think is totally irresponsible . e We cannot get into a transportation war on a provincial level.

Transportation is a federal matter and has to be dealt with by the federal government , and I think that's the only place we can put it . We can't get into a subsidy program to go ahead and sta rt subsidizing all kinds of different commodities moving around , as far as transportat ion is concerne d. So I think that should be put on the tab le. First of all, we had no idea what kind of impact the Crowrate was having on the producers of Manitoba.

We are going to, hopef ully, have that information in not too long a period of time and , number two , I don 't think we, as the west , can star t getting involved in a transportation war which will see the taxpayers of the prairies subsidiz ing all kinds of commodities going out east. It is a federal problem and the federal government will have to deal with it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: The Minister of Fitness and Amateur Sport certainly made some interesting comments , as well as the Minister of Agriculture .

At least the Minister of Agriculture now has come clean and indicated that he is prepared to see a policy of the farmer pay more for transportation . Mr . Chairman , at least he has come open and indicated that. He indicated that we've got to look at the Crowrate, Mr. Chairman, and he said , you know , we can 't keep our heads in the sand . I certainly subscribe to the statements made by Presidents of farmer-owned grain companies . These are all the statements that he indicated that he believes are very accurate and should be reviewed and should be looked at. Mr .

Chairman, I do not believe that the producers of this province , or any western grain -producing province , can pay more . Mr. Chairman , there is no need , transportat ion costs should not be added on to the costs of the farmer and his production of grain . At least I have to agree with the Minister of Fitness that transportation is a national policy and on a national basis , the transportation subsidies , if they have to be provided, should be provided on that basis . But there is no way that the producers of Manitoba should be subjected to a review and the increased costs .

Like the - I forget who it was - Minister of Agricu lture started saying about if the farmer can have $60 ,000 worth of grain , or whatever the case may be, or $60 ,000 worth of equipment at 10 percent it is costing him $6,000 a year and he would be better off to sell that grain , regardless of the price that he receives , Mr. Chairman. -(In terjection)- Well, Mr. Chairman, he did not say that. The fact of the matter is when you do away with the Crowrate that's what it means , Mr. Chairman, that the costs will be increased, that the price of the bushel will go down, that the cost per acre will decrease . Mr.

Chairman, that is the Conservative policy. Mr. Chairman , the Minister of Fitness and Amateur Sport indicated that Manitoba can't get into 2841

Thursday, April 19, 1979 a war with Saskatchewan or Alberta on transportation . Well , Mr . Chairman, this Minister of Agriculture from Manitoba , by his statements on entering into national marketing schemes of broilers, was prepared to take on the government of Alberta by his statements , by indicating that they would not enter into a national marketing scheme unless quotas , and quotas on a national basis, were to be reviewed and Manitoba could strengthen its position in the marketplace . Well , Mr. Chairman , what has that resulted in?

That has resulted in the turkey producers of Manitoba coming into an agreement which jeopardizes all the producers ' position in this province . Mr. Chairman , you are pointing your finger about grain transportation and marketing . We're talking about marketing , Mr. Chairman . We are talking about marketing, whether it be turkeys , grain or whatever , Mr. Chairman .

This Minister of Agriculture was prepared to get into a war with Alberta and his war , on the statements that he has made in the last year , have put all the producers of Manitoba who are involved in national marketing schemes in jeopardy , on the basis of the formula that was agreed to of national marketing by the Turkey Board . He now came to us last night and he said, " Look , I'm going to review it. I didn 't do anything about it , but I am going to look at it and I will call them in." But he didn 't indicate whether he agreed or disagreed with it at all, in the answers to our questions .

So that he is prepared to take Alberta on and put the producers of all commodities in jeopardy in terms of their position in national marketing schemes . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Roblin . MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Chairman, I just wonder, the political arena that we are dealing with here tonight, and this goes all across Canada on this very important subject matter which deals with the number one industry of all western Canada , and the way we're handling this debate these problems will go on forever and they will never be resolved . On this subject matter , Mr.

Chairman , I suggest to the Committee that we have got to bury our political hatred , our political axes and get back down to earth and realize that this is the number one industry and unless we can walk down the street of this city , this Legislature, hand in hand , the NDP and the Conservatives and the Liberals - unfortunatel y there are no Liberals here tonight - and deal with this subject matter in a much more sane and sensible manner than we're dealing with it tonight it's never ever going to be resolved .

We had the Farm Bureau Meeting downtown today; we have the Pool Elevators Meeting; we have all kinds of judgments and decisions that are on the record . I daresay we could pile them on this table so high and nobody has solved the problem . And we're never going to solve the problem , Mr. Chairman, ever , until we recognize that this is not a political matter . This is the survival of the number one industry of western Canada that's before us at th is time . I can raise all kinds of skeletons and problems of the former government.

I can raise problems with the Campbell government ; I can raise problems of governments all the years I have served in this House , but until on this matter , Mr. Chairman , we bury our axes, our political axes, and stand up and be counted that we are Manitobans, we're western Canadians and we're Canadians and that we go united hand and hand and bury our political axes , as I said to the Opposition , and let's help this Minister and this government. Had this subject matter come up and the crisis that is with us today was in the days of the Schreyer government I would have made the same speech, Mr. Chairman .

I am very annoyed that the nit-pick ing debates that are going on in this Resolution that 's before us has got to the level it almost makes me sick . I just can 't understand any Manitoban, especially coming from a rural area , will be nit-picking on this matter . And it's so big the whole history of western Canada is on the record , and unless we can solve this serious problem of transportation to our number one industry , either to the Ports at the west or the Ports at the east , we're going to here in a jungle like they are in Afr ica, forever . And let's nit-pick and politic on other issues , Mr.

Chai rman , but on this one I say unless we can cool our political philosophies . . . And 1 would suggest after th is examination of the Estimates of th is Minister, Mr.

Chairman , that you set up a Committee of the members of the Opposition and the members of our caucus and get with this and give them some money , much more than $85 ,000 as in this item , to go for the next 12 months and go with your blessing and you with them and the Leader of the NDP Opposition and work 12 hours a day , six days a week , not on double time-and-a-half on the weekends and go with Alberta, go with Saskatchewan , go with British Columbia and the eastern provinces , who are not involved in the Wheat Board , and solve this problem . Because , Mr.

Chairman, as sure as we're sitting, unless we - the minimum wage won 't be nothing - the people of this western breadbasket will end up being paupers unless we can solve this transportation thing . We can grow it , we have got all the expertise ; we've got the professional people ; we've got the climate; we've got the quali ty; we've got everything . And I know there 's a problem , I have been 2842

Thursday, April 19, 1979 involved in it. The eastern block don't want the grain to go east. We want it to go west or we want it to go to Churchill, and that's a roadblock. We know all those problems. But I suggest to you, Mr. Chairman , and to the members of the Opposition and the Minister that we should, instead of that item being $85,000, we'd better jack that up to about $1 million, and I suggest to you Mr.

Chairman , and to the Minister, that he set up a Committee of the best agricultural people that the NDP have in their caucus , the best agricultural people you have got in your caucus , including you , and you never rest on this matter of transportion of our number one industry and our number one prime product where half the people of the world are starving and want it, and until you can come back and satisfy me and this Committee that you 've done your job then I say don't come back. But I'm sure you will be back in 12 months looking for more money, but in the meantime I would hope , Mr.

Chairman , that the members of the Committee will bury their political axes . And I wish there was one Liberal around here to join us in this debate , but unfortunately there isn't because he is running in the federal scene . And there are other political people, as well, but they 're not elected people. We are the elected people and we're left to the jurisdiction of this very, very important matter , Mr. Chairman , and I would hope that the Opposition will bury their political hatchets and let 's vote the Minister , if we could, more money .

And I don 't think we can do it by a committee , but I suspect it has gone on so long and if we delay it another six months or another year it's too late because some other jurisdiction, which is already happening , is going to take our markets away and we will be no longer part and parcel of the heritage which was granted to us. And we weren't number one for all those years , being the best product at the best price , at the best del ivering to the Ports . Unfortunately, that hasn 't happened and we can 't deliver it.

But I'm sure if the governments of Manitoba, Saskatchewan , Alberta and British Columbia , even Ontario and the eastern , regardless of whether grain goes east or west, we don 't care, or if it goes through Churchill but we've got to have it delivered on time and a good product. And I'm sure if we play it that way and bury our political axes Manitoba will be better and Canada will be better and especially western Manitoba will be better by that type of an exercise . I thank you, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: (c)(1)-pass - the Member for Dauphin . MR. JIM GALBRAITH: Mr.

Chairman , I have sat back here for some nearly three hours now listening to this debate and I have come to a few conclusions , and right at the present time if I had to go to the farmers in the Dauphin constituency and say, " If you are interested in having your grain sit in your graineries year after year vote NDP." Right now it seems to me they don 't really care. I don't really believe that they don 't care, but that's the impression they are leaving me here in this Committee and I would just like to say that they reconsider their position .

I think that we have got to be taking a look at this whole grain situation , grain movement , grain sales , and I think we should be looking for new alternatives . We should be looking for superior methods of moving our grain , superior methods of marketing our gra in, and I encourage the New Democratic Party to join theProgressive Conservative Party of Manitoba in trying to accomplish this major concern to our agricultural industry in this province if you are going to carry on to banter this major concern of the agricultural industry of Manitoba in this manner .

We are not wanting to do away with the crowrates; we are wanting to improve the grain marketing system in Manitoba . And unless you people are going to face up to that situation you are going to pay dearly for that in the future . So I just say to the New Democratic Party , take a look at your position . We are not wanting to do away with the crowrates . We are not wan ti ng to do away with or downgrade the market ing system that we have in this country; we are wanting to improve it, to make it a superior system to what it is. That's it, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste . Rose. MR. ADAM: Mr.

Chairman, I would advise the Member for Dauphin and the Member for Roblin that we are just as concerned as they are about the movement of grain, and that's what we're discussing here tonight is moving of grain to the points of embarkation or for shipment to export markets . But our position is that we don 't want to do this and we don 't want to solve the problem by putting it on the backs of the farmers . That is why we are discussing this tonight , so that we can get some information from both sides of the House.

I have here before me 25 or 30 submissions that I have received just in the last two or three weeks , Mr. Chairman, all to do with rail abandonment, and we are concerned about it. My people 2843

Thursday, April 19, 1979 are concerned about it and I can have them tabled if you want , they 're here . There's a concern and they are talking about rail abandonment, they are talking about rail abandonment and that is the position that we feel that we should address ourselves to and I know the Premier went to Prince Rupert and his position was not accepted by the western provinces ; he bombed out on both of his propositions. The Minister of Agriculture misquoted me in his remarks and I would like to set the record straight.

I believe he attributed statements that I did not make in regard to how many millions of dollars had been lost, and what I did say, Mr. Chairman, was that in the 1977-78 crop year, railroads hauled 2 million , 2.9 million tonnes less than they were committed to deliver . That's what I said . They had committed to haul 2.9 million tonnes more than they actually did , and in addition to this, Mr. Chairman , the Wheat Board, Canada Wheat Board lost another additional 3 million tonnes of sales because the railways would or could not deliver and therefore, our customers went elsewhere . As far as dollars lost, Mr.

Chairman, I never made any comments on how much was lost , but the figures that I have is that on the average it's $3,000 for every perm it holder during that last year collectively , and probably between $450 million to $750 million in income due to the failure of deliveries of grain to positions for export. We are concerned as much as the Member for Roblin , the Member for Dauphin , so I've had all I've had to say on this subject. MR. CHAIRMAN: (c)(1)-Pass . The Member for Pembina. MR. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman , I would like to have it put on the record that the New Democratic Party . .. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Order please . The Member for Pembina , on a point of order . The Member concedes . The Member for Roblin . MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Chairman , I would like the record to show that the New Democratic Party are not prepared to support us in asking for more money on this Resolution to go further and set up this committee , so therefore, Mr .

Chairman , I would move that the minister set up a committee of Tories and farmers to pursue this matter at the earliest possible date and if more moneys are needed, then we go to the Premie r and work on this thing twelve hours a day , six days a week until we meet 12 months hence. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order , please . Is there a seconder for that motion? It would be my impression to the Members of Committee that the motion is not in order . The Member for Roblin on a point of order. MR. McKENZIE: Well, Mr.

Chairman, if I'm out of order on that Resolution , then I will move that the Resolution , the $85,000, plus the $7,200 that we're expending of taxpayers ' dollars , include a Committee of the Legislature of some MLAs and some farmers , and leave the New Democratic Party out because they don't want to be part of it. MR. CHAIRMAN: For the benefit of the Committee , would the Member for Roblin like to repeat his mot ion? MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Chairman, I would like under this Resolution that is before us, 6.(

c) Grain Tran sportation and Market ing Salaries and Other Expenditures, the total Expenditure is of the taxpayers ' dollars is $85,000 for Salaries and $7,200 for other Expenditures ; that that Item that we are passing now include a Committee of MLAs from the Conservative Party and legitimate farmers who have this problem who are interested in grain transportation and marketing , and that Committee be set up and they report back to this Committee twelve months hence . MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to ask the indulgence of the Committee while we have a short recess. Committee come back to order please . I rule the Motion of the Member for Roblin out of order based on

Section 491. The Committee may reduce the amount of a vote by the omission or reduction of Items of Expenditure of which the vote is composed . Here the power of the Committee ceases . The Member for Roblin . MR. McKENZIE : Mr. Chairman , on your point of order and the ruling , I was not suggesting that the Resolution be increased; I just asked the minister if he would include that Committee in the Resolu tion. 2844

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. CHAIRMAN: For clarification purposes, the Member for Roblin is requesting of the minister. It is not a Motion. MR. McKENZIE: Thank you, Sir. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . At least now the Conservatives, in terms of their antics, can 't argue that the New Democrats are holding up the work of the Committee . It's some of their ~ own members that want to play little games and belittle the seriousness of the problem. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister on another matter.

He answered a question of mine in the House yesterday dealing with the Quota Review Committee set up by the Wheat Board. I believe, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, he indicated to me that the Province of Manitoba did not make a submission because they had no time to prepare that. Am I accurate in that assumption? MR. DOWNEY: That's correct, Mr. Chairman. MR. URUSKI: Well, Mr. Chairman, could the minister give me the dates when they received the form letter from the Wheat Board or the Review Committee, the standard form letter that he mentioned about asking the province for a submission on the reviews? MR.

DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I believe the form letter that was received in the department was approximately October 17th, and I just use that for - I stand corrected by a day or two - getting that checked out. The report had to be, or any submissions had to be made within 30 days; because it was a form letter and not directed to anyone directly within the department , it was some several days or weeks later that it was brought to my attention, and were unable to get a position of government or proper review put together, or proper position, I should say, put together to have meaningful input.

However, I did acknowledge the form letter as I said to the Review Committee, saying that we would not be sending in a position at this time but not meaning to say that we couldn't put one in some time later to the people in charge of the quotas for the Canadian Wheat Board. MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . Did the minister not indicate or did the minister's office check whether a submission could be put in beyond the 30 day limit that was provided by in the letter? Were there any checks made , were there any submissions made beyond that date by other parties? Did anyone check that out? MR.

DOWNEY: Yes, I think there was indication, Mr. Chairman, that there could have been a position put forward later , as there still can be. I'm sure that we live in a country where we are quite capable of being able to do that at anytime. MR. URUSKI: Could the minister indicate when he wrote the letter to the Wheat Board indicating that they could not put a position forward? MR. DOWNEY: I did not, Mr. Chairman , I did not say we could not put a submission forward. I indicated - Yes, Mr. Chairman, it was after the 1st of the year that the letter went back to the Review Committee. MR.

CHAIRMAN: (c)(1)-Pass - the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . The minister indicated that he received the invitation from the Wheat Board in October, but he did not write them until the 1st of the year. Now , that's middle of October , middle of November, middle of December, and the 1st of the year - that's two and a half months later, Mr. Chairman. Was his department not able to put a submission together in two and a half months in terms of the quota review? MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , I believe the quota review had closed their . . . just after the end of November so, in fact, there was no time really , and the reason for the reply to the Quota Review Committee was to indicate that we had accepted it and the fact that we still might be putting a position forward at a later date ; and I indicated also at that particular time in my reply yesterday 2845

Thursday, April 19, 1979 that since that Quota Review Committee or the Wheat Board have made an announcemen t, they have since changed th at position . So, I think that this time, we are further reviewing what has taken place and will be making a statem ent on it very sho rtly. MR. URUSKI : So the minister indicates that he is preparing a position to the Wheat Board on the quotas? MR. DOWNEY : Yes, Mr. Chairman . We are preparing some , particularly in light of some of the recent announcements that were made . MR.

URUSKI: Would he favor the Members of the House with a copy of the position that he puts forward when he prepares it to the Wheat Board? I gather it will be going short ly, I presume since they indica te there 's been a change. MR. DOWNEY: I will be making a statement , Mr. Chairman . MR. McKENZIE: Mr.

Chairman , on grain transportation. . lA Rail now has taken over the transpor tation of people of both railroads across Canada - I wonder if the Honourable Minister has any records of studies that the former government did , or information that they laid on his desk or left in the records of the department from that amalgamation of the two railroads turning over the transportation of people to VIA Rail? And the reason I ask that , Mr .

Chairman , is because now VIA Rail and those that are using that system and we have some in our caucus that use it on a regular basis and I use it myself, it looks that it's going to be a worse disaster than the grain transportation system , because anybody today that wants to try to travel on this VIA Rail system' he'd better be well prepared because he's never sure when he's goin g to leave and he's never sure when he's going to arrive and he's never sure what kind of accommodation he would get on the system .

As a couple of members of our Committee found out recently on the Easter weekend , VIA Rail finally realized at the last minute the re were some 90 passengers that had booked for several months were going out on this certain night and when the train was supposed to leave the cit y, they had to go to Transcona and get anothe r car to transport those 90 people.

So it's quite clear that there was some deals when the members opposite , that VIA Rail was being amalgamate d, the two railroads , and I'm wondering if any of those records, or the papers , or presentations of reports or studies that the former government are in the minister 's office today to let us know what they did in those days . MR. DOWNEY: Not to my knowledge , Mr. Chairman . I'm unaware of any papers on that subject matter . MR. CHAIRMAN: (c)(1)-Passhe Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Thank you . Is this the area where we could discuss or ask questions with respect to Plant Breeders rights? MR.

DOWNEY : We passed that , Mr . Chairman . It would be in Crop Production . MR. CHAIRMAN: (c)(1)-Pass; (c)(2)-Pass; (c)-Pass . (d)(1)- Pass - the Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, I presume the Manitoba Marketing Board and The Milk Control Board would fall under this area . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister . MR. DOWNEY: Not The Milk Control Board , Mr. Chairman , that was under the production division of the department . I stand corrected , I know we've discussed that. I'll just check back here . I think it was in the administration of the Department , Mr. Chairman. Yes, Mr .

Chairman , it was in program 1 in the administration of the department. We've already passed that one. MR. URUSKI: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . I wonder if the Minister would indicate whether they are moving in the area of ama lgamating the two boards as they have indicate d that they were in favour of the Milk Producer 's Board and The Milk Control Board into one board . Members of their party 2846

Thursday, April 19, 1979 certainly advocated that position in the last Legislature and can the Minister indicate what moves they 're making in that direction? MR. DOWNEY: Well, Mr. Chairman , I don't believe that I as the Minister indicated that there was a move in that direction . The Milk Control Board, as he is quite aware of, is

an Act of the Legislature and the Manitoba Marketing Board comes under the Natural Products Marketing Act . They are two separate Acts of government and I did not indicate that there was any intent to amalgamate those two boards. MR. URUSKI: Well, Mr. Chairman, I wasn't indicating the Manitoba Marketing Board and The Milk Control Board, The Milk Producers' Marketing Board and The Milk Control Board. One being a producer marketing agency and the other being the consumer regulatory body dealing with the cost of milk and the markup and return to producers and processors .

There certainly was advocated by the now Minister of Highways and I believe the Minister of Consumer Affairs, the Member for Morris , certainly made statements in that regard . I am wondering whether the Minister has any policy statement or any statements he wishes to make in that respect , whether they are moving in that way or not . MR. DOWNEY: No we are not , Mr. Chairman, moving in that direction at this time.

I think we have discussed The Milk Marketing Board, The Milk Control Board, and I indicated then I was asked if there were any changes and I said no, so I would have to indicate the only area in which we're discussing now is under the Manitoba Marketing Boards . MR. CHAIRMAN: (dX1)-pass -the Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate the names of the present members of the Manitoba Marketing Board. MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, the chairman of the Manitoba Marketing Board is Dr. Art Wood, vice-chairman is Mr. Reg Forbes, we have Mr. Herb Andreasen, Mr. Howard Motheral, and Mr.

Clayton Manness . MR. CHAIRMAN: (d)(1)-pass; . (d)(2)-pass ; (d)-pass Resolution 11 - Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $738 ,100 for Agriculture-pass; Resolution 12, Item 7, Agricultural Land and Water Development, 7.(a)(1)-pass -the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate the staff that is involved in the whole area, go through it branch by branch at the beginning and indicate the numbers of staff and the vacancies and increases or reductions? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. MR.

DOWNEY: I think we'd be just as well to go through it just one by one as we come to it and then we are in line with the way we have done the past ones I believe , Mr. Chairman . In the Administration of the Agricultural Land and Water Division we have two staff , that being the position of the Assistant Deputy-Minister and support staff to him. -(Interjection)- MR. DOWNEY: No, Mr. Chairman . MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , who is the Deputy Minister of that? MR. DOWNEY: It's still vacant , Mr. Chairman . MR. URUSKI: When is the Minister intending to make the appointment? Has he advertised or MR.

DOWNEY: Well again , Mr. Chairman , as the member is aware it's a Cabinet appointment and it will be done very shortly. MR. CHAIRMAN: (aX1)-pass; (a)(2)-pass; (a)-pass; (b)(1)-pass; (b)(2)-pass-the Member for St. George . 2847

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, could the Minister indicate the changes that are in this and in the expenditure here? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, in the Rural Water Development which 1 feel is a very important part of the total Department of Agriculture, we're looking at an increase of 5 staff . There was an increase of 5. We are sitting with 10.4 SMYs as opposed to 5.4 last year . MR. URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate the nature of the program that he is envisaging in this expenditure? The details of that? MR. DOWNEY: Well, Mr.

Chairman , under the Rural Water Development program we are looking at water source development for rural Manitoba. Just to finish , Mr. Chairman , in Manitoba we are in a fortunate position of having at certain times of the year an excess of high quality water which causes problems. I feel that within rural Manitoba we have to look towards better water management programs so that we can in fact, in periods of short water , that we can work towards development of programs so that we can provide them with the needed infrastructure to develop their farm units .

We also have some interesting projects that are being developed throughout the province and that of course being in theffield of irrigation. I think that we have something like a million and a half acres that are of irrigatable type soils. At this particular time we are only irrigating something like 11,000 acres but in fact we have somewhat of a large area that could in fact be irrigated and of course that being one of the limiting factors in some areas in which we could increase production in particular special crops, high value crops, so I think that is also an important aspect of it.

Another area in which I'd like to just discuss briefly and that being the development of water source for livestock units.

I think that we can go to certain areas of the province where in fact the development of a livestock unit hinges totally on the availability of water and to see the numbers of water trucks, tanking trucks throughout rural Manitoba , that we have seen over the past few months certainly restrict the development of a lot of livestock units , and again it carries through that if we were to have a constant sure supply of top quality water, that we would see a development of a lot more units that would in fact use feed grains , develop their units . So I think it's a very important area in which we have to recognize.

Another area in which I feel it 's very important that we participate with the Land and Water Development Division and that is in the community water source activity area .

I think that over the past few years the members are quite aware that under the Water Services Board , in fact a lot of the communities of 300 or 350 of a population were able to be serviced with water and sewer and we find that a lot of the smaller communities that possibly have the desire to grow and expand have been unable to because of a government program that would work with them to supply these smaller communities with water and that is one of the other area s that we are addressing our attention to .

We also have the community well program which is a source development for communities in which they can draw upon for water in areas of short supp ly. So I think that another area that we are working in, this of course all relates to the source development and that is the area of connecting some of these communities with pipelines .

I think that when we talk of looking for water a lot of money has been spent in the past many years in certain communities , certain farm areas that have spent endless hours and dollars in search for water under the ground and have been unable to be successful in that particular area .

We feel that in working with the rural authorities, say the local government districts or the municipalities that in working with them we might be able to provide a program that can in fact facilitate the bringing of water to certain farms or communities through a program of pipelining and able to provide them with a source of water from one or two miles away through the pipeline system that could in fact make the rural development , the development of a lot of agricultura l farms or agricultural community sites something of a far more att ractive place and more encouraging to them to develop .

So 1 think that they to me are programs which are truly an area of indicated need. As far as I'm concerne it is an area where government should be emphasizing their efforts because it is the upgrading of infrastructure such as the provision of roads . It could be compared to the provision of hydro that in fact the development of rural Manitoba was somewhat inhibited without a source of electrical power .

I think that to enter into a program such as we are discussing at this particular time , with the prov ision of water or the assistance of the provision of water through design of systems and working through the local communities that we can in fact remove one more obstacle that is possibly in the way of the development of rural farms and communities. MR. CHAIRMAN: (bX1)-pass-the Member for St. George . 2848

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate whether the farm sewer and water program is continuing or has that been dropped? MR. DOWNEY: That , Mr. Chairman , was an ARDA program which is not in place any longer. - (Interjection)- Yes, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister . Pass-the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . Could the Minister indicate whether the program of providing dug out pumping, is that being continued as well? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman. MR.

URUSKI: And dealing with drainage, farm drainage programs , is that being on farm drainage in terms of doing the surveys, is that being continued? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . MR. URUSKI: At the level that it was, that there 's no reduction there? MR. DOWNEY: The same level, Mr. Chairman. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, the program of supplying farm dwellings and farm people with the supplies of water and plumbing supplies under the Water Services Board or Water Services Warehouse , that's also been discontinued, Mr. Chairman , am I correct? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . MR.

URUSKI: The Minister I believe last session indicated that he was planning to discontinue the bulk purchasing through the Water Services Board of items for rural farm families in terms of equipment at cost price and the markup of course was enough to cover the total cost of the program . Does the Minister have any reason why he discontinued the program? Was it not being used? Could he indicate whether the program was not being utilized by people in rural areas? Were purchases being made from the province or was there a fall-off of sales from the province? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister . MR.

DOWNEY: I think, Mr. Chairman , we hashed this through last year 's Estimates , and I think not to enter into a long , extensive debate into the reasons why I could just summarize it briefly , and that is; No. 1, that one of the concerns of us, as a government , was the fact that a lot of the installations , after being purchased through government purchasing houses , that in fact the individuals who were in the rural communities , in hardwares and plumbing businesses , were going broke, or starv ing to death , because they weren 't getting any business.

They did not feel justified in going out and servicing a unit that some government purchasing department had supplied , and it was the servicing of the product , or the equipment that was put in, that was causing a lot of concern to me and , again , the government being in that type of a business, as far as I was concerned , was in direct conflict of our philosophy and of our policy of upgrading the private sector in rural Manitoba.

So I don 't think the farm people were deprived of anything more than they were , in fact, I'll go back and say I think they are now totally being serviced by the local plumbers , the local suppliers of the goods , and we're back on a system where the people who sell the product are responsible , in fact , they can depend on repairs and servicing of that equipment because it is in fact purchased through local suppliers , and we as a government can concentrate our efforts in the area of development of water and working with the survey type work which has been discussed earlier in these Estimates . MR.

CHAIRMAN (Mr . McGregor): 7.(b)(1) - the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Mr. Chairman, the Minister made a statement that I don't think is correct. I think he should reflect on what he said . He mentioned that the program of bulk purchasing for plumbing supplies was putting people - people were going broke . That isn't correct . 2849

Thursday, April 19, 1979 A MEMBER: Yes, it is. MR. ADAM: It is not correct , Sir . I submit to you that in my area things were just booming. Plumbers business was booming because of this program. They had all kinds of trenching and backhoeing and all indoor plumbing, all indoor plumbing, the bathtubs , the toilets that the bulk purchasing didn't supply. They made a landslide business with this program , Mr .

Chairman , and the fact that there were many, many hundreds of farmers, in the thousands, that took advantage of this program indicates that it was a good program , so I don't want the Minister to leave those remarks unchallenged . It was a similar program to the Drugs Program , the bulk purchasing of drugs, so for the Minister to say that that program was putting plumbers out of business is just not correct , Mr. Chairman . But I want to ask the Minister if, in his answer to the Member for St.

George on the on-farm drainage program - there was a program, I believe , where there was up to $500 assistance, or up to $700 assistance . Is that . . . ? MR. DOWNEY: I don 't believe there was any assistance program for drainage , Mr. Chairman . It was technical assistance and survey for the farmers . MR. ADAM: Another question . In regard to rural communities , does this apply to remote communities as well in Northern Affairs , Mr. Chairman? MR. DOWNEY: Pardon me. I missed the question . Would you repeat the question please? MR. ADAM: Yes.

I was asking the Minister under the Rural Water Development Program , do remote communities qualify for this program as well , or just . . . ? MR. DOWNEY: South of 53. MR. ADAM: South of 53 or 52. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, that would be under the Northlands Agreement. They had a program for water development in northlands and that's where that would come under - the Minister of Northern Affairs . MR. ADAM: What areas do we cover here? From Swan River back? MR. DOWNEY: Mainly the agricultural areas , Mr . Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(b)(1)-pass - the Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

I wanted to make just a couple of comments where the Minister , to myself and the Member for Ste . Rose, indicated that he has discontinued the bulk purchasing program last year . Could he tell me why if he discontinued the bulk purchasing , why he would have discontinued the program of grants to the farm community in terms of the sewer and water program? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , that fell under the ARDA Agreement which ended the end of December . MR.

URUSKI: Was there an intent to renew it or were the applications falling off and the Federal Government didn 't want to continue that program any longer , or was it felt that primarily all the farm homes and yards had been serviced already in the eight or nine years of this program? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , I think , as I indicated , the program ended because it was a federal ARDA Agreement.

The other point that I'd like to make is the fact that , as far as I'm concerned and within the department and the government are concerned, we feel it's more important at this particular time to concentrate on source development and put our efforts into that particular area. As far as the continuing on with the ARDA Agreement , again , there are some water programs in the new agreement under the AgraMan , under the drainage part of it, and some work being done , as 1 said , in the area of irrigation .

That , of course , will be debated under the Enabling vote so there is some moneys being made available under the Enabling vote under the Manitoba Agricultural and Canada Agreement. 2850

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste . Rose. MR. ADAM: Mr. Chairman, just one question on that particular subject. I believe that back in 1969 about 60 percent of the farmers did not have modern conveniences, such as water and sewer, and modern facilities in their homes . This program, I know, was very popular and there are many hundreds and probably thousands of farmers that availed themselves of this program .

I wonder if the Minister could advise what percentage of the farm population now still do not have modern facilites, such as water and sewer and baths and showers and toilets and what have you - sinks? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, you know, I wouldn't want to leave the impression that the program that was in place wasn't of assistance . I guess we could ask the same question - I think, in fact, there would have been improvements of those kinds of services in farm homes whether there was a program or not. I think the thing that we should say is how do we measure whether in fact the program totally did it?

I would say that it did assist. I know there were certain areas that took advantage of it and it was a program that was of use. We don't have any figures . I've just been informed by the department that they have requested the update statistical figures on that particular subject; what are the numbers of farm homes with the total facilities and that particular thing. And again I go back and say the program did in fact provide certain assistance in areas of need in this particular area.

I think that it was a continuing desire of farm people to upgrade their facilities whether or not there was a program in place, but in fact it did assist them so I will say that it was a program that was of meaning to them .

But I also want to say that our emphasis at this particular time - again I go back to the area of source development - I think that if the source is there that the people in the rural communities don 't mind investing in that kind of infrastructure for development of that kind of service , but to continually spend money to try and find water or to continually search for water that either isn't there or is unavailable to them is a far greater hardship on them than to invest in the type of equipment that is needed to distribute it within their house or farm facilities. MR. ADAM: Yes. Mr.

Chairman, under that program I know that farm families were able to obtain up to about $700 in grants and savings on bulk purchases which was quite an inducement between the two, up to $300, 15 percent on purchases , with savings on bulk purchases in addition to that. It was possible to save substantial amounts of money and I believe that many , many farm families took advantage to modernize their homes with modern conveniences solely on the basis of this program.

I have been personally involved in assisting many , many farms in my area to obtain benefits under this program, and I know this was a worthwhile program . Sure it has a snowballing effect ; when one starts, they all start, and I think it was good. But it would be interesting to know just how many there are left, and the Minister probably could obtain that information, he shouldn't have any trouble getting that. MR. DOWNEY: I just want to clarify . The program which the member referrs , I believe the grant was up to $300 , not $700, for a correction of the record. MR. CHAIRMAN: ?.(b) - the Member for Ste . Rose.

MR. ADAM: I don't think that that is quite correct. I think there was savings on bulk purchases . -(Interjection)- Yes. Of course. And you could save about $700 on the total. I figured it out many times for a lot of people . MR. DOWNEY: Well , Mr. Chairman, it depends on the total amount of the purchase, I guess, that would reflect the amount of saving if it were through the government office .

Again I want to go back and clarify to the member that if, being bought through a central government office in Winnipeg and you're living in Roblin , Manitoba , then the plumber is going to certainly look twice at you and probably not even consider giving you the service that he would have given you if he'd have been involved in the sales and the installation . That's the point I tried to make, Mr. Chairman, that how do you expect the plumber in rural Manitoba to live if, in fact , he is not a part of the supplying of material and the installation and the ongoing service . Because , Mr.

Chairman, the money he would have to charge for a service call would be prohibitive for the individuals to go out and employ him, and that is the break in the rural communities that was created by government being involved in the supplying of goods to farmers. You could carry it right through to the point where governments 2851

Thursday, April 19, 1979 supplied every input to the farm community and, Mr. Chairman, what do you do in that particular case is you ruin, you ruin the total infrastructure of services that are provided in rural Manitoba . MR. ADAM: Mr. Chairman, the Minister hasn't been listening to me, or else he doesn't believe me . Probably the latter. But , Mr. Chairman , I just got done telling him that the bulk purchasing did not supply bathtubs or sinks or things in the house , just for exterior and the pressure pumps.

The pressure pumps and out , the rest , all the plumbing inside was all coming from the plumbers and they made a landslide business . I know that in my own area , there were three plumbers there who cou ldn 't keep going. The minister won 't get away with that argument. He's now becoming philosophical and political in his approach but this program did work, we know it worked, and if it was there , there would be probably more farmers using it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St . George . MR. URUSKI: Could I ask the minister, Mr. Chairman, what criteria did he use to discontinue that program?

What was his information that led to the discontinuance of that program? MR. CHAIRMAN : The Honourable Minister . MR. DOWNEY: The program of the purchase of materials . MR. URUSKI : No. The Grant Program . MR. DOWNEY: Well, Mr. Chairman , I go back and again say it was the end of the program of the Federal-Provincial cost sharing . MR. URUSKI: Well , Mr . Chairman , the minister also in his remarks, indicated that it was their priority , " their " emphasis , that led them to move into looking at the water source of the programming .

He did not indicate that the program could not continue had it been a priority of the government. Is the minister indicating that because of his priority and nothing else, in terms of the Conservative administration 's priority , that's the reason why that program was discontinued? MR. DOWNEY: Well , Mr. Chairman , I again go back and say our priority is in the source development and . . . MR. URUSKI: At least now we know that the minister is indicating that it was a political decision, in terms of discontinuing both programs.

First of all, his philosophy would not lead him to want to provide bulk purchasing supplies to rural fami lies because it went against his grain of philosophy. Yet he could live with a bit of, not subsidy, but a bit of straddling of the fence by being able to provide veterinary supplies through bulk purchasing, that's okay in terms of a soci ally useful program, but in terms of plumbing supplies for the fields , septic fields and hoses and lines, that's not all right.

And at least he now admits that in terms of the grant structure to the farm families that it was a political decision that it was not the Conservative governmen t's priority to continue that program , and that is the reason why it was discontinued . MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , I just want to clarify for the member, and I clarified it when we were in the Veterinary Department. In fact , the reason that we are continuing on with that, the main reason is the fact that it is drug-controlled through the veterinarians.

There is a responsibility of government to control the use of drugs that go into animal use, and which directly could affect the human beings . And that , Mr. Chairman , is the main reason , plus the fact there are some cost savings which go along with it, but in fact all indications are that I have to make the decision to continue on with that. The major consideration is because of the health factor, the health factor with the use of drugs that can directly affect the health of human beings that are being used in animal health . Secondly , for the benefit of the Member for Ste .

Rose, that if you don 't have a source of water , the bathtub and the toilet aren 't much good to you . MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , the minister can 't tell me thatthe drugs were not available through the veterinarians and through the feed mills , and through recognized dealers throughout the province . There 's no doubt that there was a saving , and a saving could be made on very large bulk purchases, which could be distributed to veterinarians , but the supply certainly was no different in terms of 2852

Thursday, April 19, 1979 drugs as it was in terms of plumbing . The control, if the minister philosophically is opposed to the government handling it, he can still have the control measures , in terms of inspection and handling, that the program now handles . Because it's being distributed through veterinarians and the drugs could be purchased before through veterinarians. So this basically in terms of inspection and control, could have been accomplished whether he handled the drugs or not , if he wanted a way to handle it. If he can 't I'd like to know why he couldn 't. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 7.(bX1)-pass; 7.(bX2)-pass ... MR. URUSKI: Well, Mr. Chairman, 7.(b)(2) the total program has increased substantially . Could the minister indicate what the breakdown of the funds in the various components of the program are in the increase from $49,000 to $263,000? What are we really talking about, in terms of the various programs? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the major increase , if I'm reading this correctly , was in the area of staff increase, the increase in the staff and expenses to cover those people. MR. URUSKI: Primarily administrative . MR. DOWNEY: The majority, Mr. Chairman , is staff . MR.

URUSKI: And dealing with all the sources, the livestock sources, the irrigation , these would be all specialists in their fields , community water source, pipeline connection , community well service, those would be technical staff within the department. MR. DOWNEY: Yes. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , I did have one other question. There was some work being done in the department dealing with water source , in terms of many areas having very high salinity in the water, and what progress has been made in this respect? MR.

DOWNEY: I guess the member is refer ring to the injection of fresh water to remove salt water in a certa in area - that research project is still continuing. It is continuing and I haven 't got an update report on it , but that program is being carried on as the member refers to. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(b)(2)-pass ; 7.(cX1)-pass - the Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Could the minister outl ine the staff commitments here, and the nature of the program? MR. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, the Water Services Board , as he has been familiar with , I am sure, is the provision of water and sewer to commun ities in Manitoba that want to participate in an agreement with the province . There has been an increase in one staff . We are continuing with the development of water projects in Manitoba. We have something like 29 communities that will be worked with in 1979-80. It's one of the areas that is carrying on at the capacity of which the Water Services Board are able to provide this service . As I say, we have increased the staff by one. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(cX1)-pass - the member for St. George .

MR. URUSKI: Yes, Mr. Chairman, of the 29 communities that the minister has indicated that will be worked with, could he indicate whether some of them are completions of projects, which are new and could he indicate what the nature of the program is going to be to these 29 communities, or if he's got a list of the communities that will be worked with, is it possible to prov ide that list to members , or would he want to detail it into the record? Whichever suits him . MR. DOWNEY: Well , Mr. Chairman , there are some of these communities that are having extensions put to them , if it's a subdivision to a town .

I don 't have that broken out precisely ; some of them are entering into new agreements with sewer and water, some with just sewer or some with just water . The department have not broken that down precisely. Do you want the names of the towns, Mr. Chairman? 2853

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. URUSKI: Yes, I wouldn 't mind and the amount of money that is estimated for the project that you're talking about. MR. DOWNEY: Okay, Mr. Chairman , we're looking at water and sewage systems, Elm Creek; water system, Swan Lake . MR. URUSKI: Do you have a dollar amount , please? MR. DOWNEY: No I don 't, Mr. Chairman , no I don 't, Mr. Chairman . Sewer systems, Blumenort, Elm Creek . Well, Mr. Chairman , I've listed this again , it's under both water and sewer , Elm Creek was, and it's listed again under sewer systems so it's a multiple deal system . Right.

Foxwarren , Ninette , Sanford . Improvements and extensions , we're looking at Altona , Arborg , Cranberry Portage , Dauphin , Deloraine, Emerson, Gimli , Grandview, Hamiota , Minnedosa , Morris , Neepawa , Oakville, Pilot Mound , Portage Ia Prairie , Reston , Roblin , Shoal Lake , Ste . Rose du Lac, sure we're looking after the Member for Ste . Rose du Lac too. We should 've started on this part of the Estimates. Stonewall, Virden , Wawanesa and Winnipeg Beach - those were the extensions , Mr . Chairman . MR.

URUSKI: Could I ask the minister whether the policy of dealing with the communities is on a first-come, first-served first served basis , other than where recognized health problems might be developed and those communities then of course would be brought up to the priority list - that policy is being continued with . MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: 7. The Member for St. George . MR. URUSKI: Has the makeup of the board changed at all, Mr . Chairman? MR. DOWNEY: No, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste . Rose. MR.

ADAM: I don 't know where I got this information , but I was told that there was some organizational changes in the Water Services Board . How is the . .. MR. DOWNEY: I don 't know , Mr. Chairman , maybe it 's where he got some of the other information . MR. ADAM: Yeah . I was told that ... is Mr. Stokes still there , or does he deal with ... Is that him there? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr . Chairman MR. ADAM: And is still the person who deals with the municipalities at the local level. MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(cX1)-pass ; 7.(cX2)-pass ; 7(dX1) - the Member for St. George . MR.

URUSKI: Can the minister detail the staff and the expenditures in this

section please? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . Last year we had 39.36 plus seven contracts . This year we have 46.36 permanent SMYs. MR. URUSKI: The same amount? MR. DOWNEY: That 's right , i t's the same amount , there is no change in the staff complement. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , has the minister developed the policy dealing with Crown lands? Is there a change in the policy of leasing out the Crown lands? 2854

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. DOWNEY: No, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(d)(1) - the Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman , the Crown lands tha t are being leased now , that come up for leases, are they being leased in the same basis in terms of need and size of unit and the like , being continued to be leased? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . MR. URUSKI: The point system then is being utilized , along with the Crown Lands Appeal Board , is under this

section as well? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr . Chairman . MR. URUSKI: Could the Minister indicate who the members of the Crown Lands Appeal Board are? MR. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman . The Chairman is Mr. Doug Watt , the members are Lloyd G. Briese, from the Gladstone-Neepawa area , Emil Johnson , Harold Boerhers from the Interlake Dauphin area , Ste . Rose area , Laurier , William Tkachuk from the southeast corner of the province , and Emil Johnson from Lunda r. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(d)(1)- the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Yes, thank you. Could the Minister advise what is the per diem for the Appeal Board now? MR.

DOWNEY: There has been no change in the per diem rates since we have come into office, Mr. Chairman . I can get that information. MR. ADAM: The Chairman 's position , is that a per diem as well , there's no change there, or is that on a salary . That 's a per diem? ... MR. DOWNEY: That's a per diem , Mr. Chairman, and there is no change . .. MR. ADAM: I see. The Minister has indicated that there 's no change in the policy on Crown lands . The Throne Speech indicates something in regard to C rown lands .

His staff , I can say, is going around the country , rightly or wrongly , int imating to peop le that Crown lands are going to be sold , and I don 't know , t he Min ister - we asked him quest ions in the House on a number of occasions , we have asked him here again tonight - I would like to know why the staff is tell ing people that Crown lands , even one of his board members had a statement in the Dauphin Herald where he was intimating that very shortly lands would be sold.

Now , I'm wondering why the Minister is saying that there is no change in policy , and yet the staff is going out , not only at the lower level but some at the management level are saying that. So I would like to know why , if the Minister has no polic y it 's in the Throne Speech , would he expla in why it's in the Throne Speech if there is no polic y. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , we're in the process of developing a Crown land sale policy of some of the agricul tu re Crown lands .

There is no secret about it, it was campaigned on by many of the members of the government , and at this particular point there hasn 't been a sale policy announced, but we're in the process of doing that . MR. ADAM: Yes, I know that just dur ing these Estimates when we were on the MACC debate, the government and the Minister was criticizing very much the policy of the land-lease program to allocate these agr iculture lands on the base of from father to son and in that way. We were criticized for doing that , and I'm just wondering how the government would handle the sale of Crown lands .

Would that be on a tender? Or to the highest bidder , or, the lowest bidder, the highest bidder not necessar ily accepted? Will there be an appraisal made by the Land Acquisition Branch to assure that the people's assets are not flittered away such as we've seen in the other area , the MACC lands that they've been taking back? 2855

Thursday, April 19, 1979 MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, when the program is announced he will be able to review the type of policy we have. I aim also might mention that the actual disposition of Crown lands will come under the Minister of Mines and Resources . He is the authority of disposition of Crown lands. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7. (d)(1)- the Member for Ste . Rose. MR. ADAM: Mr. Chairman, I'm just wondering if the Minister is delaying making a statement on government policy to wait till after the Session is over so that we can't question, intersessionally we won 't be able to question it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St.

George . MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman . Well, Mr. Chairman , we have the Minister tonight indicating that there is no policy of dealing with Crown land sales as they have indicate d that they would be bringing forward in this Session in the Throne Speech . Mr. Chairman , the Min ister berated the opposition that during their term of office they would use a selective system of allowing or distributing Crown lands on the basis of the point system and the basis of size of operation and the age of the operator and the nature of his operation in terms of whether or not he should lease that land .

Now we have the Minister indicating that, yes, it's not such a bad policy, we're continuing with it, we're not changing it whatsoever , so that we're carrying on with what was in place when we came into office . It certainly seems that the Minister of Agriculture , who hated that policy , who wanted to have the mark etplace establish the rental value , surely after 18 months he should have come up with some kind of a policy in terms of either changing the lease program in the way it's being operated , or, as the Minister of Mines, at least come to this committee and indicate what the policy is.

I know we questioned the Ministe r of Mines , in his Estimates , and although during his Estimates he indicated that he answered the questions with respect to policy and I went back to Hansard and I checked his remarks , and there certainly was no policy stated . -(I nterjection) - That 's who it was , he indicated that he answered all the questions qith respect to government policy and there is no government policy, the Minister hasn 't come up with a policy and was not prepared to indicate what their intentions are , other than to say that they are intending to sell, but they 're prepared to acknowledge that the system that was put into place wasn 't such a bad system , Mr.

Chairman , because if they were prepared to change it , they could have changed it overnig ht in terms of leasing the land out to the highest bidder , the same way as they had it when we came into office in 1969. So that although they criticized the method of leasing at as it is today , they 're not prepared to change it as yet , - at least that's what they keep saying . They 've had 18 months and they are not prepared to change it. This Minister is going to sit in the bushes , hide till the Session is over , and then maybe he will come out and announce a pol icy on the Crown lands . MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Emerson . MR. DRIEDGER: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . All I would like to say at this stage of the game , and I'd like to encourage the Minister very strongly that he encourage the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources to proceed with his policy in terms of selling of Crown lands . In my area , and with some of the people I've met even today, are very strongly in favour of getting a program in place and I think we shouldpproceed posthaste and I agree with the Member for St. George who says that we should work on something along these lines . I certainly want to encourage that. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(d)(1) - the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Yes, 1 have just the one question to ask the Minister . He indicated that perhaps these 't' questions should be addressed to the Minister of Mines , that he would be allocating Crown lands, or selling them if ever they were sold . If that is the case, I would ask the Minister why is his staff, who are not staff members of the Minister of Mines , why is his staff going out and telling people, yes, we're going to be selling land any day now . This is the question that I asked the Minister, ... why? Has he instructed his staff to do that? To prepare them?

Or what is the reason for that? MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairm

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-3-43b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 3rd hansardpdf 43b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	3d8d5cd43a3fd8db8ee15f350d5c4a373a646dd4

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