Manitoba Hansard — 13 August 1970 (Sitting 178, 29th Legislature, 2nd Session)

29-2-178

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable Ben Hanuschak Vol. XVII No. 178 2:30p.m., Thursday, August 13th, 1970. Second Session, 29th Legislature. Printed by R. S. Evans - Queen's Printer for Province of Manitoba

ELECTORAL DIVISION ARTHUR ASSINIBOIA Bl RTLE-RUSSELL BRANDON EAST BRANDON WEST BURROWS CHARLESWOOD CHURCHILL CRESCENTWOOD DAUPHIN ELMWOOD EMERSON FUN FLON FORT GARRY FORT ROUGE GIMLI GLADSTONE INKSTER KILDONAN LAC DU BONNET LAKESIDE LA VERENDRYE LOGAN MINNEDOSA MORRIS OSBORNE PEMBINA POINT DOUGLAS PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE RADISSON RHINELAND RIEL RIVER HEIGHTS ROBLIN ROCK LAKE ROSSMERE RUPERTSLAND ST_ BONIFACE ST_ GEORGE ST_JAMES ST_JOHNS ST. MATTHEWS ST. VITAL STE. ROSE SELKIRK SEVEN OAKS SOURIS-KILLARNEY SPRINGFIELD STURGEON CREEK SWAN RIVER THE PAS THOMPSON TRANSCONA VIRDEN WELLINGTON WINNIPEG CENTRE WOLSELEY NAME J.

Douglas Watt Steve Patrick Harry E_ Graham Hon. Leonard S. Evans Edward McGill Hon. Ben Hanuschak Arthur Moug Gordon Wilbert Beard Cy Gonick Hon. Peter Burtniak Russell J. Doern Gabriel Girard Thomas Barrow L. R. (Bud) Sherman Mrs. Inez Trueman John C. Gottfried James Robert Ferguson Hon. Sidney Green, O.C. Peter Fox Hon. Sam Uskiw Harry J. Enns Leonard A. Barkman William Jenkins Walter Weir Warner H. Jorgenson lan Turnbull George Henderson Donald Malinowski Gordon E. Johnston Harry Shafransky Jacob M. Froese Donald W. Craik Sidney Spivak, Q.C. J. Wally McKenzie Henry J. Einarson Hon. Ed.

Schreyer Jean Allard Laurent L. Desjardins William Uruski Hon. A. H. Mackling, Q.C. Hon. Saul Cherniack, Q.C_ Wally Johannson J. A. Hardy Gildas Molgat Hon. Howard Pawley Hon. Saul A. Miller Earl McKellar Hon. Rene E. Toupin Frank Johnston James H. Bilton Ron McBryde Hon. Joseph P. Borowski Hon. Russell Paulley Morris McGregor Hon. Philir Petu!'SSOn J. R. (Bud) Boyce Leonard H. Claydon ADDRESS Reston, Manitoba 10 Red Robin Place, Winnipeg 12 Binscarth, Manitoba Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 222B Princess Ave-.

Brandon, Man- 11 Aster Ave., Winnipeg 17 29 Willow Ridge Rd., Winnipeg 20 148 Riverside Drive, Thompson, Man. 115 Kingsway, Winnipeg 9 Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 705 - 33 Kennedy St., Winnipeg 1 25 Lomond Blvd., St. Boniface 6 Cranberry Portage, Manitoba 86 Niagara St., Winnipeg 9 179 Oxford St., Winnipeg 9 44- 3rd Ave., Gimli, Man.

Gladstone, Manitoba Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 627 Prince Rupert Ave_, Winnipeg 15 Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 Woodlands, Manitoba Box 130, Steinbach, Man. 1287 Alexander Ave., Winnipeg 3 Room 250, Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 Box 1B5, Morris, Man. 284 Wildwood Park, Winnipeg 19 Manitou, Manitoba 361 Burrows Ave., Winnipeg 4 Room 248, Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 4 Maplehurst Rd., St. Boniface 6 Box 40, Winkler, Manitoba 2 River Lane, Winnipeg B 1516 Mathers Bay, West, Winnipeg 9 Inglis, Manitoba Glenboro, Manitoba Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 602 - 245 Provencher Ave., St.

Boniface 6 357 Des Meurons St., St. Boniface 6 Box 629, Arborg, Manitoba Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 15- 500 Burnell St., Winnipeg 10 11 Glenlawn Ave., Winnipeg B 463 Kingston Crescent, Winnipeg B Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 Nesbitt, Manitoba Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 310 Overdale St., Winnipeg 12 Swan River, Manitoba 531 Greenacres Blvd., Winnipeg 12 Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 Kenton, Manitoba Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg 1 777 Winnipeg Ave., Winnipeg 3 116% Sherbrook St., Winnipeg 1

I~ THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2:30 o'clock, Thursday, August 13, 1970 Opening Prayer by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions; Reading and Receiving Petitions; Presenting Re._ ports by standing and Special Committees; Notices of Motion; Introduction of Bills; Orders of the Day. The Honourable Member for Riel. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD MR. DONALD W. CRAIK (Riel): Mr. Speaker, I have a question to the Minister of Firiance.

I wonder if he can advise me whether the Public utilities Committee will have· an op portunity to sit before a final decision is made by the government with respect to the flooding of South Indian Lake . HON. SAUL CHERNIACK, Q.C. (Minister of Fint:nce)(St. Johns): No, Mr. SJM:aker I'm. not in a position to advise him to that effect. .. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, a subsequent question. Can the Minister advise at this time whether the Hydro has applied for a license? MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, I have not reread the letter, which I glanced at very superficially, about which I spoke to the House.

I have not seen it since the last time I an swered a similar question, but my impression is, again, that there is no application for a license to government. MR. CRAIK: Would the Minister assure us that the decision on the flooding will not be made before the next session of the Legislature? MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, I will not give any assurance as it's a matter of policy. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. HARRY ENNS (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I direct a question to the First Min:ister.

During the last session, that is the session in the fall, he indicated in a major speech with re spect to Southern Indian Lake that your government was prepared to make some payment, {)r some compensation, for the anxiety and stress caused by the whole question of whether or riot Southern Indian Lake was to be flooded or not. Has the government come to any decision in making some kind of compensation or payment towards the residents of Southern Indian Lake and Granville Lake with respect to this matter? HON. ED. SCHREYER (Premier}(Rossmere): Well, Mr.

Speaker, the matter as to what kind of diversion, if any, is to take place at South Indian Lake not having been settled yet, it is difficult to make any determination as to the factor of stress, etc., that the honourable mem ber refers to. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. I wonder if he could confirm the conerns of the fishermen that the fishing season is going to be closed for the Winter season as well as the summer.

The second part of the question was whether or not arrangements can be announced yet with regards to any compensation plan other than the summer plan. HON. SIDNEY GREEN, Q.C. (Minister of Mines and Natural Resources)(Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I am unable to say that there will be a winter fishing season. That's about as far as I can go at the present time. The question as to how this will affect the compensation program that's in existence and what in the long range will have to be done, is now being discussed be tween the department and the fishermen. MR. CRAIK: A subsequent question, Mr. Speaker.

The speculation among the fisher men is that the season may be closed for up to about five years. Now, realistically, do you have any information that might allay these fears? MR. GREEN: Well, Mr. Speaker, these questions are always so difficult to answer without either raising hopes or creating false alarms. I am unable to say at this time that the winter season will be open. The question as to what we have to do in the long range is one which the department is actively considering because we have to be prepared for any contingency. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member of Agriculture. HON.

SAMUEL USKIW (Minister of Agriculture)(Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave an answer to a question on the part of the Honourable Member for Virden with respect to the position of the Canadian Wheat Board and areas, on the question of lack of delivery due to box car shortages and so forth. The news media reported inaccurately~ I noticed in yester day's Free Press they quote a new quota of four bushels per acre; that is, they quote me as /

4656 August 13, 1970 (MR. USKIW cont'd.). having said that there was to be a new quota of four bushels per acre. That is not accurate, and for the sake of accuracy, Mr. Speaker, I would like to again reiterate what I said yesterday and make a correction there as well, that for the crop year Just . ended July 31st, the quotas in effect to that date were durum eight bushels, rye thirteen bushels, flax and rapeseed open, barley sixteen bushels. Now where people were not able to deliver fully those quotas, they wlll not have an opportunity to do so after the end of that crop year.

With respect to the guarantee on the part of the Canadian Wheat Board and the Government of Canada, on a four bushel quota on specified acreage, where one was not able to deliver be cause of circumstances which were mentioned yesterday - and I might illustrate them again: shortage of box car or some lack of facility - that where producers can prove that this is the case, that there will be consideration given to that producer to have those deliveries made at this point. But that only applies to the four bushel quota on specified acreage.

The new crop year, which started on August 1st, in the new crop year we have the following quotas: rye, five bushels per acre; flax, three bushels; rape seed, three bushels. That's it, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPBAUR: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. WARNER H. JORGENSON (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the .Minister of Agriculture which relates to the administration of the affairs of his depart ment, and ask him if he has taken action yet against the .Minister of Transportation for violations of the Noxious Weeds Act. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, if I might answer that, I'm told that the Minister of Trans- portation --(Interjection) --That was a question. A MEMBER: No, it's out of order • .MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Charleswood . .MR. ARTHUR ·MOUG (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Transportation. Owing to the remark that he made during the proceedings here the other day, would he be willing to name the government or the Minister in charge to stop ex propriation proceedings On. the Inner Beltway? Mr. Speaker, in order to make it justified to the .... .MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

Would the honourable member put a question . .MR. MOUG: I demand -I demand an answer to ..•. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. A MEMBER: He doesn't have to answer. Sit down .... MR. MOUG: Well, he should. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I direct a question to the First Minister. Could he confirm whether or not a Mr. Fred Petruik is in the employ of his office in some capacity or other ? MR. SCHREYER: If I was able to hear correctly the Honourable Member for Lakeside, he mentioned a Mr. Petruik - yes, and asking if he was in any way in the employ of the office of the Premier. The answer is no; in no capacity. MR. ENNS: Fine, Mr.

Speaker. I'm happy to receive that answer. Then I direct a ques tion, Mr. Speaker, and it's arepetitionofa question that has been asked before, and as a result of this particular name •... MR. SPEAKER: Has the honourable member a question? MR. ENNS: Yes I have a question -which is being indicated within the constituency that one of the three Ministers ••.•. MR. SPEAKER: Would the honourable member put his question. MR. ENNS: I'm asking the question of the Attorney-General. A Mr. Fred Petruik has indicated that one of the three former Ministers .•... MR. SPEAKER: Would the honourable member please ask a question.

MR. ENNS: This is my question- that one of the three former ToryMinistersnameswill be behind ••.• MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. ENNS: ...• will be behind bars .•.. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. ENNS: ..•• before the situation in Dauphin is •... MR. SPEAKER: Order. Order. C-rder. The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. GORDON W.

BEARD (Churchill): I'd like to direct a question, further to pollution, to the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources, and I do ask him if any investigation has taken place where they're considering doing away with those polluted fish completely in some of the lakes so that they can be re-stocked.

August 13, 1970 4~57 MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker,, that is not a consideration. Apparently the theory is. that the fish will become unpolluted in a given.period of time. They are not fishing them out and incin~ erating them as they did in Cedar Lake last year. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MR. SIDNEY SPIVAK, Q.C. (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Min ister of Labour. I wonder whether he can confirm the latest Dominion Bureau of Statistics which indicate that there are 18, 000 people looking for jobs in Manitoba - two and a half times as many as last year. MR. SCHREYER: ....

Mr. Speaker, it's necessary to give any response to that. I would say that if you take that in proportion to the experience in other jurisdictions and at the national level that it is not any deviation. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Charleswood. MR. MOUG: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the First Minister. Could the First Minister tell us, the government or the Minister in charge at the time that expropriation proceedings were ordered to a halt on the Inner Beltway. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, this question has been asked on a number of.occasions in the past and the reply that was given at the time stands. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Swan River. MR. JAMES H. BILTON (Swan River): I wonder if I might direct a question to the Honour able the Attorney-General. Would the Attorney-General kindly indicate to the House as to whether or not the three Ministers mentioned in a Dauphin incident are due to be charged. HON. AL. MACKLING, Q.C. (Attorney-General)(St. James): Mr. Speaker, I've already answered that question in the House some days ago. It's in the negative -my answer stands. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. JACOB M. FROESE (Rhineland): I'd like to address a question to the Minister of, I think it's Municipal Affairs. Will the Boundaries Commission Report, once it's obtained by the government, be distributed or do we have to wait till the next session before members will be getting it? HON. HOWARD R. PAWLEY (Minister of Municipal Affairs)(Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, in sofar as the report of the Boundaries Commission, it would be my understanding that it will be made available once it has been released to the public, and that will be before the next session. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MR. SPIVAK: I wonder if the Honourable Minister could confirm that the report contains a recommendation for nine cities for Greater Winnipeg. A MEMBER: The question is out of order. MR. PAWLEY: Well, I'm quite pleased to advise the honourable member that I'm not aware of the recommendations within that report, and it interests me that he should know, ap parently, more than I know in respect to those recommendations. MR.

SCHREYER: On a point of order, there is a practice in this House, which perhaps is not a good one, and that is that- and in a sense it's a self-admonition- that there's a tend ency to answer questions that may well be out of order, and I would ask you, Sir, to indicate to any member of the Treasury Bench if they are trying to answer questions which you have ruled or are ruling out of order, to advise them that their answer is equally out of order. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MR. SPIVAK: Well, my question is to the First Minister.

I wonder whetherhe can in form the House whether he or any member of the government has been informed that the recommendation would be nine cities for Greater Winnipeg. MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, it's my impression that that question is out of order. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Swan River. MR. BILTON: .... the Honourable Minister would appreciate the fact that while the question may be out of order ... MR. SPEAKER: Order. MR. BILTON: .... the Minister can answer it if he so desires. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: .... question, Mr.

Speaker, to the Honourable Minister of Transportation. Can the Minister of Transportation now indicate the exact number of dismissais and demotions within the Dauphin Highway situation? MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Chairman .... MR. ENNS: It's not out of order.

4658 AUgllSt 13, 1970 MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Chairman, this is a question that was asked, I believe, a day ago, certafllly two days ago, and an answer was given. The same answer. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, I then ask the Minister, the First Minister, a subsequent question to the First Minister, Is the First Minister's arithmetic correct with respect to the nu.mber of people that have been fired or dismissed that appeared in the papers yesterday? Or is the Minister of Transportation --I'm just trying to clear ...•. BON. JOSEPH P. BOROWSKI (Minister of Transportation)(Thompson): Mr.

Speaker, I believe the First Minister indicated there was one person demoted. There were six persons de moted and one was fired. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. BEARD: I'd like to address a question on this final day, I suppose, to the Minister of Social Development. Has the province and the Federal Government been able to come to a formula in which those people in the north who find fish an integral part of their food substance, have they been able to come up with a formula to give them assistance to supplement their in come? BON. RENE E.

TOUPIN (Minister of Health and Social Development)(Springfield): Mr. Speaker, yes. We've indicated, I believe about a month and a half ago, that this would be taken care of, not only for the people of Churchill or the surrounding areas but anywhere in Manitoba where the fish was contaminated, that we would be giving help to these people and this would be cost shared by the Federal Government based on need. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Souris-Killarney. MR. EARL McKELLAR (Souris-Killarney): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Health.

When do you expect to receive the Commission's report dealing with hospital beds? MR. TOUPIN: Mr. Speaker, there was a set date on this but it is being revised. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR. GILDAS MOLGAT (Ste. Rose): Mr. Speaker, I have on the Votes and Proceedings a Notice of Motion which I suspect we will not reach. I wonder if I could ask the Minister, I presume the Minister of Government Services, has he had a chance to look at the questions, and can I ask him those questions now, or is he prepared to give me a reply? BON.

RUSSELL PAULLEY (Minister of Government Services)(Transcona): Mr. Speaker, I guess we can take some license in the procedures of the House as they stand at the present time. My colleague the Minister of Finance says no. I've been around a couple of years longer and I think maybe that I can, with your indulgence Mr. -- my friend says I'm getting too sloppy. I have been accused of being more than sloppy during this session. But I would say to my bon~ ourable friend, I have noticed the Notice of Motion, which apparently will not be up, for today.

I'll be glad to discuss this with my honourable friend, hopefully, that we will not be here tomor row, and I would like, Mr. Speaker, to indicate to my honourable friend without going through the formality of the receipt of the Notice of Motion, that the answer to all of his questions, by and large it's yes, studies were made. MR. MOLGAT: Well then, a subsequent question. Is the government considering retain ing the three main elements; that is, the Concert Hall, the stage and the smaller hall, for continued use ? MR. PAULLEY: May I, in reply to that, and of course, Mr.

Speaker, my honourable friend could have asked this as a direct question on Orders of the Day and I accept it in that light. It is a question of government policy and I may say, Mr. Speaker, to my honourable friend, I believe I replied to a similar question some months ago, that the matter is under active consideration by the cabinet and the government. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MR. SPIVAK: A supplementary question to the Minister of Government Services. Is it not a fact that the instructions were given.... Is it directly related ..... MR.

SPEAKER: I believe the honourable member is well aware that he's asking an argumentative question. MR. SPIVAK: Mr. Speaker, were instructions not given to those in charge of the Audi torium to cancel and terminate all arrangements after a specific date ? I believe it was March or April, of this coming year. MR. PAULLEY: No, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon West.

\ August 13; 1970 4659 MR. EDWARD McGILL.(Brandon We.st): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Ho110urable the First Minister and relates to his earlier announcement that the head office of the Crown cor poration for automobile insurance will be established in Brandon. In view of this establishment in Brandon, is he also considering relocating the Highway Traffic Department at Brandon? MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, I'm not able to answer my honoUrable friend in any detail with respect to that question.

I seem to recollect that the Department of Government Services is in the process of designing a structure which will be serving a number of government dep.rt ments in the Brandon area, the City of Brandon. Whether there is any conne·ction between the Highway building my honourable friend refers to and the structure that Government Services is working on, I cannot say at the moment. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. MORRIS McGREGOR (Virden): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct this. question probably to the First Minister or the Treasury Branch.

Inasmuch as we are into our fourth month -- (Interjection) -- Mr. Speaker, I think I have the floor, and they can't figure any better than they could yesterday -- in the fourth month since our living allowance has been cut ~ff, is there any consideration, because the rural members are handicapped; it's mileage and it's phone calls and many things, and I'm not one digging for money but I think it is discouraging rural members' future candidacy when we're on -- and it seems each year it's getting longer. The question is: is there any consideration?

I know once it packs up -I know I've approached the First Minister and others privately. I haven't got anything definite and I'd like to sort of know. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, I might say that I have heard some suggestion earlier that this be considered, and I have inquired and made certain that if the decision is made, a bill of the Legislature will have to be brought and this could be brought at the next session to apply retroactively.

Now there is a committee of the Legislature which is responsible for studying all the factors and I would think that that committee should have the authority to consider this question as well and make recommendations. MR. SPIVAK: A supplementary question to, the Minister of Finance. Would he consider his statement a six-month hoist? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. GEORGE HENDERSON (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. What recourse have the people that were flooded out if they are not satisfied with their settlement? MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, the setting up of the Board is part of the Orders-in-council. My understanding is that that is a strictly ex gratia payment that is made and there is no appeal, so the only appeal is to try to get the Appeal Board to raise it; that there is no appeal from that question. I was asked the same question yesterday. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Youth and Education. Could he confirm or otherwise that 50 percent of the school divisions are still in the process of arbitration over 1970 salaries? HON. SAUL A.

MILLER (Minister of Youth and Education)(Seven Oaks): I cannot confirm that figure. MR. CRAIK: A related question, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister indicate whether the government is considering imposing bargaining deadline dates for 1971? MR. MILLER: We are not considering that at the present time. We are con•i&!ring many options . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. HENDERSON: A further question for the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. Did I understand you to say that they have no other appeal than to the Appeal Board, the Flood Board that was set up? MR. GREEN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, that's my recollection. I wouldn't be positive but that is my recollection. The Flood Board is set up to consider making ex gratia payments. It hears the case and it decides for it or against it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. HENRY J. EINARSON (Rock Lake): Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the Min ister of Education. I asked the same question early in the session and I'm wondering if the Minister has any change of policy in this regard, and the question is this: Has his department given any further consideration to making the non-unitary divisions at the present time unitary?

4660 Aug\lst 13, 1970 MR. MILLER: It's a matter of policy, Mr. Speaker. 1 can't give him a direct answer right now. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. The Honourable House Leader. ORDERS OF THE DAY- PRIVATE MEMBERS' RESOLUTIONS MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, would you call the Resolution that was being held by the Hon ourable the Minister for Cultural Affairs. MR. SPEAKER: The proposed motion of the Honourable Member for Rhineland, and the proposed motion of the Honourable Member for Osborne in amendment thereto, and the motion of the Honourable Member for Crescentwood in further amendment thereto.

The Honourable Minister of Cultural Affairs. HON. PIDLIP PETURSSON (Minister of Cultural Affairs) (Wellington): Mr. Speaker, at the time that the House adjourned at 12:30 I was dealing with this question and was speaking of the minority groups in the churches, indicating that if some of the major denominations were to be given special assistance for the education of their children in the particular religion that they represented, then the minority groups were being discriminated against in a sense that they would not be receiving the same kind of support for the propagation of their particular faith.

It has been pointed out to me that there is a church in Winnipeg, the Polish National Catholic Church. It is the only one of its kind in Winnipeg. It does not have a sufficient number of children to set up a special school in which the educational requirements would be fulfilled and therefore would be one of the minority groups.

There are several other churches, such as the Buddhist Temple, the Mormon Church, the Christian Science Church, the Moslem Society, the Moslem Church, Society of Friends, and so on, a great number of minor groupings that could not get that kind of support that is being requested for private or parochial schools, that is, public money. But in a sense they are all at the present time being subsidized by the exemp tion of taxes; they do not have to pay taxes on the church property or on the schools that they now operate, and in that sense they are recei\ring a very substantial subsidy for their operation.

The Honourable Member for st. Boniface suggested that asking for, or insisting that the parents pay for the children who now are attending private schools, would be something some~ what similar to asking a person who wanted to buy a Coke to buy also an Orange Crush or something of that sort, in addition to the Coke, as a prerequisite to his obtaining the thing that he desired. I don't think it is anything of the sort; but take a parallel with the police department. Police protection is provided for all the citizens of the city and of the province.

If any one in dividual wishes additional police protection, a watchman or some such thing, then he pays that on his own; he doesn't have access to the public purse to pay for that additional protection which he feels, under certain circumstances, he needs; and the same would apply to the schools. If that illustration of buying two drinks if you want only one applies, then this suggestion of addi tional police protection applies equally well. It may not in exact terms, but still, it is there for consideration.

Several years ago a Royal Commission was set up in Alberta to study education there and to bring in a report, and after having looked over the scene and made exhaustive studies of the school situation in Alberta, a report was produced which is popularly known as the Cameron Re port. It's the Royal Commission on Education, Report of the Royal Commission on Education in the Province of Alberta.

Now in Alberta they do have separate schools at the present time, and it will be interesting for members to note that the Commission --maybe I can give the names of the men or the individuals who sat on that commission: It was headed up by Senator Donald Cameron, hence the name "Cameron Report". Gordon Leslie Mowat, a Doctor in Education was vice-chairman; Miss D. A. Hansen, who has a university degree, sat on it; Mrs. W. C. Taylor, a housewife; JohnS. Cormack, a lawyer; and Norman W. Douglas, a private citizen.

These people sat on that Commission and, among other things, when they reached the point where they wished to make recommendations about private and separate schools, they had this to say, and I would wish to put this on the record for the purposes with which we are dealing at the present time. On Page 271 of that report we read these following words in a couple of paragraphs.

It says: "No denominational group should have direct influence or control over even a segment of the public school system, particularly \Since denominational interests are given priority over educational interests in any situation where the two are in conflict. It is understandable that such is the case, since the ideal of the separate school system is fundamentally that of the

August 13,, 1970 4661 (MR. PETURSSON cont'd.) ••••. Catholic Church. As such, it is beyond compro~ise. NeVertheless, ~ot all Canadians take kindly to external authority, whatever its source, control ling or undUly influencing the nature of edUcation in Alberta. A major concept in Canadian education is that it should be non-denominational, The 'Conimissioh. re-affirms its support of this point of view • " . And if 1 may, Mr. Speaker, I just wish to continue the readiD.g from the same report.

"The indiscriminate establishment of some separate school districts in Alberta may be taken as a tangfule indication of the priority of religious over secular tasks of education.

Particularly in rural areas of small school population and limited resources, the formation of separate schools has resulted in such fragmentation of the public school system as to produce inevitably sub standard educational opportunity." And the report goes on: "In the present period of our history, when many of the concepts of free western democracy are being challenged milita:ily, economically and culturally, and when there is the most urgent need to strengthen our whole school system, the Commission must view with concern any proposals or actions which would have the effect of weakening the system.

It feels strongly that the indiscriminate formation of separate schools not only weakens and dis rupts the public schools, but also acts as a divisive force in many communities. The Commis sion appreciates the significance of religion to individuals, groups and society at large, but it contends that the strength and even the feasibility of a truly public school system lies in the separation of church and state.

Catholic and Protestant minorities have the right to establish separate schools but educational authorities must make such provisions as are necessary to eliminate, or at least reduce insofar as possible, those consequences which contribute to the deterioration of the public school system." · That and much more, Mr. Speaker, could be read from this report but I would let that suffice.

We, as legislators, are not here to contribute to the "ghettoization" if I may use that term, of our school system, but to provide an education for the children that attend the schools, and I would suggest that we come from manybackgrounds but we have a fundamental unity as citizens of one nation. Why should we give public support to that which can only divide? There is much more that could be said on this subject, Mr. Speaker, but I have been warned that many members are anxious to get away this afternoon and I will let that suffice and trust that these words may have some influence.

It is my purpose to vote against the amend ments and against the original motion. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the sub-amendment and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the amendment and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the motion as amended. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I indicated that I would move an amendment to the motion as amended if it got to that stage.

I move, seconded by the Honourable the Member for Crescent wood, that the resolution be amended by striking out all the words following the word ''consider" in the first line thereof and substituting therefor the following: "methods of resolving some of the difficulties and deficiencies inherent in the existing public educational system, in which know ledge respecting matters of religion and cultural background of the various groups in our society is relatively inaccessible". MR. SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. MOLGAT: Would you read the amendment again, because we have no copies, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to say, however, that in view of the discussions that have gone on in Committee, I take it that if it is being read it is not necessarily accepted, because I may raise a point of order as to its being a proper amendment. MR. SPEAKER: " ••. methods of resolving some of the difficulties and deficiencies in herent in the existing public educational system, in which knowledge respecting matters of religion and cultural background of the various groups in our society is relatively inaccessible." Are you ready for the question? MR.

MOLGAT: I wonder if the motion is in order because it introduces an entirely new and different principle to that of the original motion. There is a motion that speaks of financial grants of aid to schools. This one speaks of other matters altogether dealing -- it doesn't deal with the finances; it refers to difficulties and deficiencies in the existing public educational system. The motion as introduced in the first place is not that at all. It refers to schools that

4662 August 13, 1970 (MR. KOLGAT cont'd.). • are ''not" in the public educational system, and this amendment, it seems to me, is completely a reversal and not 011 the point of the original motion. It goes on to another question. The Honourable Minister may feel that there are some deficiencies in the public school system; if he does, it is up to him to bring in a resolution to correct that, but I think that his amendment now is really contrary to the original motion proposed by the Member for Rhineland. :MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, may I speak to the point of order?

Tbe Member for Rhine land's proposal and the submissioos that have been made in favour of it are intended to deal with a particular question, by taking public funds. Tbe question that they intend to deal with is an educational question and an educational problem relating to what they term as "parental rights" and the question of a religion, the question of private schools and why they are necessary. My amendment proposes to do the same thing in a different way.

I say rather than taking the public funds and financing these problems in the private institutions, that we take the public funds, we consider ways in which the public funds could be used to handle the same problem, ·or what I consider to be the problem that has been raised and which is the issue which is raised by the Member for Rhineland, by dealing with those problems in the public school system, and I Submit, Mr.

Speaker, that indeed, while it does propose a different remedy, and that is often the case with an amendment, that it deals with the subject matter that has been raised by the Member for Rhineland and proposes a different solution. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. BEARD: Are we speaking on the point of order or are you accepting this amendment, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER: I have accepted it. MR. BEARD: I do feel, as probably the Member for Ste.

Rose pointed out, that certainly it has changed a great deal of, might I say the philosophy behind what I think was the original amendment itself, and it's rather strange that after 100 years that we can't really come to an agreement as to what the real difficulty is.

I don't particularly feel that this is one church or ooe culture that is predominant or trying to, in their way, enforce their ideas on people, and I listened to the Minister for Cultural Affairs this morning and I was interested, particularly in what he read, and his ·comments after, and I'm sorry I couldn't be in for all the comments but it was, as he said, I believe, a theory almost, a philosophy that he had quoted from when he read this particular portion into the record, and it was somebody from England, I believe, and I don't think that we in Manitoba have to stray to England for advice in this case, nor do we have to go out of our country to make an assessment as to something that has gone on in other coun tries, because I suppose if there was one thing that was a real emotional problem in this Province of Manitoba, education is, when it is considered in private or parochial schools, and some wish to call it one and some wish to call it the other.

Some call it separate schools. But I would say maybe it would be best called "alternative" schools. There are some people that say that education at the high school level is at public cost, and this is right, but when you get to university, universities are only for the rich people and only for the people that can afford it.

I go back again in my thought to the people that have a con viction of what they wish their children, how they wish their children to be educated, and I myself have chosen the public school system for my children, and in fact if this was two years ago, I would be using every method, I think, possible to try and find some way to defeat this same resolution that is before me, and I don't know what made me change but I always felt that my children were best going to school with the child next door so that they had everything in com mon and there would be less chance of them having a fight and less chance of that wall, that terrible wall, we '11 call it, of religion and the discrepancies in religion being built up between them.

But then, I've softened in my feelings towards this and realized really that children over come that in their own minds. It's only when we become adults that we discriminate and hurt people. So we go back again to the parent and the guardian that wants to decide - and he has the right to decide -what he should do inasmuch as bringing up his children. He has a legal re sponsibility to see that his children are brought up in the way that he feels they should be.

"Alternative" schooling gives them the opportunity to make a choice, and when they make that choice they do so knowing that it is going to cost them money to do. So even if the resolution is brought in on, as it was originally designed by the Member for Rhineland, I feel that it is recog nizing that some people are contributing more towards the education costs of Manitoba than others. Granted, it's by choice but sometimes, Mr. Speaker, it's by necessity, and so far the

August 13, 1970 4663 (MR. BEARD cont'd.). . Government of Manitoba has not, even taken that par:t of it into consideration, that it is by necessity.that people have to choose altern,ative schooling for ~ir children, and they have not chosen to help them. I think there'.s probably a fine line between ideologies outside of the educational system, or rather between the educational system and the religious system, I'll agree.

All one has to, read is the history of Canada, I suppose, under the French authors and under the English . authors, but that is as it may be, and I think that you have to accept that and you have to read both if you want to really have the history of Canada, make a choice as to what happened in the history of Canada. And so it is that there was discrimination either one way or the other from the very first part of the time in which the white people came to this country, and it ignored, I suppose, iii the history, the writings of the Indian people because they did not have any way in which to record their history.

But fortunately we did not have the discrimination that the Minister this morning spoke of in the States, not the real hard discrimination of where a part of our people had to ride in the back of buses, or a part of our people couldn't sit on one side of the restaurant, or part of our people couldn't go to one school; that they in fact had the opposite to us- they,,had two sets of school systems, one we'll call for the second class citizen, which was the Negro- and the Indian, I would imagine, almost fell into that class but I'm not sure on that -and the other for the white people, and the white people were predominant.

But I would point out to the Minister that there has been recognition of this in those many areas and they tried to do something about it, and he quite rightly pointed out that people fought against that change and they said that there would not be integration, that they would not have a public school system in which both types of American people could go to that same school.

And they had to fight it through to the Supreme Court and they had to fight it through to the President of the United States, and it was only then, as I recall, that a ruling was brought back, and in fact armies were sent in to make sure that they put in the integration. But this was a totally different type of discrimination to what we have now. People did not have a choice down there; they have a choice here. But when they choose, they choose to not only support one system but they have to support the other too. The Minister of Cultural Affairs said, how democratic can you be? And he is right.

How democratic can you be? Are you going to support a small school for Unitarians, as he said, where they have one church in Winnipeg, or maybe the Baptists where they have not as many churches as some other part of the city, but this is really not what people are thinking of. I think this has got off the basis of it. They are not there to brainwash, as I understand, children to become good Anglicans and to hate all other types of religion.

I've never heard of anybody coming out of a private school system and saying, "I was taught that no one else, no other reli gion was right except mine'', and I think that the alternative school type of system offers a great deal of assistance to those many, many students who cannot today get along in the public school system because, by and large, a public school system is, in the larger urban areas particularly, becoming a factory and I do not say this to criticize the Department of Education.

It has kept on for many years and it was started many years ago, but they're becoming isolated from their teachers and so consequently some students need a better or a more personalized type of teach ing system, and I suppose we would say the alternative system would be the one in w_hich those children turn to, not only because they take more teaching but probably because they.have a social problem, a social and personal problem, and unfortunately they have personal problems themselves fitting in with their own family and fitting in with the co=unity and being a hard core type of person that has to ..•• MR.

PETURSSON: May I ask a question? MR. BEARD: Yes, go ahead. MR. PETURSSON: Is the Honourable Member from Churchill suggesting -- I wasn't sure whether I followed the argument exactly, but is the suggestion being made that private schools can operate the kind of a service which the public schools are not capable of doing? Is that what you were suggesting? MR.

BEARD: Yes, I would have to say that it is my impression that there is evidence that the alternative school system to the public school system have in many many cases provided the ladder for many children to continue on in school where the public school system could not cope with that child, not only because of his ability to learn in school but because of the social environment, not only in his home, but in the social environment out side of his own home. It was locked in, and I am sure the Minister of Social Development could

4664 August 13, 1970 (MR. BEARD cont'd.). • probably bring many many bard core cases to you and prove to you that these children gDOW up in these environments and they themselves become a problem to society as a whole. On the other hand, I would say that I've also known cases where children did not really get along in the alternative school system and chose themselves to go back, want to come back home and go to the public school system.

But it was the parents' choice to be able to send them, but when the child got there, eventually gave the child the option of whether they wanted to stay or whether they wanted to impress their family that really it was better for them to go back. But there'smany modern types of approaches to this. If we're talking on the religious sector, I don't think there has to be an Anglican school; I don't think there has to be a Roman Catholic school or a Mormon school; not side by side in the community. -- (Interjection) --Perhaps. Perhaps they could get together and unite under one type of alternative school system.

Perhaps they can move some way towards cutting down the costs. MR. PETURSSON: •••• interested in having the honourable member develop his thought, and if he would be able to pinpoint specific types of children or types of schools that are giving the kind of service that he is suggesting that private schools are giving that the public schools cannot. I know that the public schools, particularly in Winnipeg, are providing services for the handicapped, for the retardates and others of a similar nature, physically handicapped.

But I was wondering whether that is the type of school that the honourable member is suggesting that private schools can give that the public schools cannot, or whether there is some other area that for some reason the public schools are incapable of covering. MR. BEARD: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think that we're getting into a questions and answers discussion between the Minister of Cultural Affairs and myself. There are children that are on borderline cases of retardation, I suppose. I don't know what they grow up to be - politicians? Or -well, it might be, but they are slow learners and such on.

Theyneedasystem different than what is being used. In other words, if I'm living in one town and I only have one public school system to send my child to, then I have no alternative - and there shouldn't be in a community where there's only one school, I'll admit that.

But where the urban areas are larger and can accommodate more and more children and they have more children that obviously would want to go to that school, then I would hopefully think that it would be given an alternative school for my child to go to if he just isn't making the grade, or her, in the school that they're going to, and rather than have them dropouts, which is l{Oing to cost the taxpayer a great deal of money in many cases throughout their whole life, or throughout part of their life, then the alternative school system would help.

But even if you took that away and just went right down to the straight dollars and cents and said to these people that want to go out and have an alternative school, ''You have a respon sibility as well as government, and the government cannot call upon the taxpayer that wants to . have a public school system and subsidize your child because he wants to go to a Roman Catholic school or an Anglican school because they don't want to send their children." But I do say that there are cases where people going to --using these alternative school systems are paying in fact teachers; they're paying the heat of the building; they're paying for a cost that is not being charged to the educational program in our province today.

And all I say, I say the start of it and the only start that I would advocate at this time, would be that the Minister of EdUcation take a look at this and he can best assess haw much it costs to send a student to school, and say, "We will offer you this much, we will offer you this much of our tax dollar if you want to send your child to that school. You will have to accept the rest of it." Now it only may be half or it may be a third, but it could be operational.

It doesn't cost the people of Manitoba a nickel over and above what their obligation is to the public school system today, and really the strength of my argument is I feel that if these people are determined to run their own schools, they're taking a load off the Department of Education and it is by their choice, but I say, on the other hand, cannot we consider giving back to those people a refund on what it would normally have cost to send their child to a public school system?

The Member from Rhineland keeps reminding us that they refund money in B.C. to house holders on housing, so I think that this could be done even to the people that send them to the private school system. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. FROESE: Mr. Chairman, I'll be very brief. I just want to state that the amendment that is being proposed is completely unacceptable to me. I rather suspect it was out of order in

August 13, 1970 4665 (MR. FROESE cont'd.) ••••• the first place, but Mr. Speaker, as you'll have ~d. I won•t debate that point, but it brings in a completely different aspect of education. It goes out irito a completely different direction and I certainly cannot support it. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the amendment and after a voice vote declared tbe amendment lost. MR. CRAIK: Yeas and nays, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members. Has the honourable member support? Call in the members.

The question on the motion of the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Re sources in amendment to the motion of the Honourable Member for Rhineland. A STANDING VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs. Barrow, Boyce, Cherniack, Doern, Evans, Fox, Green, Jenkins, Johannson, McBryde, Malinowski, Miller, Paulley, Petursson, Shafranky, Uskiw and Urllski. NAYS: Messrs. Allard, Barkman, Beard, Bilta..J., Borowski, Burtniak, Claydon, Craik, Desjardins, Einarson, Enns, Ferguson, Froese, Girard, Gonick, Gottfried, Graham, Hardy, Henderson, G.

Johnston, Jorgenson, McGill, McGregor, McKellar, McKenzie, Maclding, Molgat, Moug, Patrick, Pawley, Schreyer, Sherman, Spivak, Toupin, Turnbull and Mrs. Trueman. MR. CLERK: Yeas, 17; Nays, 36. MR. SPEAKER: I declare the amendment lost. The question on the main motion. The Honourable Member for River Heights. MR. SPIVAK: Mr. Speaker, I intend to speak only for a few moments. I would like to indicate to the House my reason for supporting the motion in its amended form. Mr. Speaker, we live in Manitoba and in Canada in a pluralistic society, and I speak as one who belongs to a minority group.

We have an opportunity, Mr. Speaker, in passing this resolution to move one step forward in the correction of a historical injustice to a minority in this province. Minorities ought not to be oppressed by majorities and I believe, Mr. Speaker, that parents should have the choice of sending their children to a public or a parochial school without the need or the threat of double taxation. Mr. Chairman, we, in our society, in the hundredth year of Manitoba's history, ought to cherish the opportunity to preserve and maintain the right of a minority; and Mr.

Chairman, this position should be consistent in this issue as it should be in others. Mr. Chairman, we have an opportunity, I suggest, in supporting and improving this resolution of moving one step forward in what I cOnsider has been an historical injustice to a minority in this province. MR. SPEAKER: •..• question on the amendment? The Honourable Member for Crescent wood. MR. CY GONICK (Cre scentwood): Mr. Speaker, in view of the remarks of the Member for-River Heights, I'm going to have to indicate to the House why I would favour the resolution, which is for somewhat different reasons.

The reason is not to restore necessarily -that is the main reason is not to restore the particular rights of any particular group, though that's a problem which I concede, but to encourage parents, teachers and students for that matter, to develop their own curriculum, to develop their own system of education which is appropriate in terms of their own values -it doesn't matter to me who they are -I want to make that clear - whether they happen to be Catholics or Jews or anarchists or whatever their particular point of view, I think they should have the right, as a group, to develop a curriculum which is approved of, to be sure, by the Department of Education.

This I think is very important. We should do what we can to encourage initiative on the part of parents and teachers to develop alternative styles of schools with different values and different approaches to education and I see this resolution, as now worded, providing us with an opportunity to move to that kind of a diverse as against monolithic educational system and that is why I would support the resolution.

4666 August 13, 1970 MR. SPEAKER: The Bonolirable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker. I want to speak very briefly about the resolution. I spoke at some length on the resolution earlier. Mr. Speaker, it has disturbed me that for 11ome time recently in the Bouse that we have found some difficulty in speaking honestly and truthfully about matters that individual members feel very close to themselves. Some members have taken advantage of the Bouse or taken the opportunity of the Bouse to speak that way and I now choose to speak that way on this particular matter. MT. Speaker. I am a Christian.

I am proud of being a Christian. I am proud also of doing anything I can to further the Judeo-Christian concept of our western culture. I think that this is a culture and a concept that needs furtherance and needs support in our society and I say very openly and very plainly that those are my reasons for supporting this particular question and this particular motive. If you want to make any issue of it, then do so as you will. I make no special occasion or plea for this particular point.

We profess to a belief of Christianity in this country; we profess to a belief in the Judeo-Cbristian culture of the western \\'Orld in this country, in this province, and I can say without any conflict with my honourable friend, my colleague the Member from River Heights, and myself, that for this reason and for the reasons that the Member for St.

Boniface also supports these motions or this movement. that I think that we have an occasion now to redress some of the wrongs of the past .century and do it with the recognition that we are in Manitoba in the year of 1970 not back in the days when the whole Manitoba school question became a political football, that I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that we have had a great deal of discussion about hang-ups, ideological hang-ups on a particular bill a little while ago, and I suggest to you, Mr.

Speaker, that we politicians in this Chamber are hung-up on the question of aid to private and parochial schools because we think there is a great deal of politics involved. Mr. Speaker, I don't be lieve there is that much politics involved. I think, Mr. Speaker, and I see the First Minister recognizing itJ Mr. Speaker. it's not for me to suggest how or the mechanics or how we ap proach it.

All I'm trying to suggest to you that we all have evolved, we all have come through a process of evolution to\\·ards a greater tolerance for our fellow man, towards a greater tolerance for our differences between the mosaic that makes up this great Province of Mani toba and the country of Canada; and in that sense. Mr.

Speaker, I think it's time that we rid ourselves of the political hang-•.Ips that kind of linger in the curtains of this Legislature with respect to this question and I would urge, I would urge the First Minister to move with courage and with determination in this matter. recogllizlng as I would like to indicate to him, that I do not think, honestly and sincerely, that it is a matter of great political issue in this province today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. MR. JEAN ALLARD (Rupertsland): I shall be as brief as I usually am, Mr. Speaker.

I believe in freedom, I believe in the dignity of the individual. There are others who believe in these things and who will disagree with my judgment. I believe in freedom, the dignity of man, the equality of man; I believe in the rights of a child to the love and the protection that his parents afford him, that it is their responsibility to give to him, and it is, using my judgment, for these reasons, I will support this motion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. BUD SHERMAN (Fort Garry): I shall be briefer than I usually am, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to say that I agree with my colleagues, the Members for River Heights and Lakeside with respect to what they have had to say about redress of wrongs and I said as much when I spoke on the resolution originally.

To that I would like to add my reasons for supporting this resolution and I would like to emphasize that it is, in fact, at this point, a resolution asking the government to consider the advisability of this matter only and is not a final rigid ;.;:ind of step into which either the administration or anyone else in this Legislative Chamber is locked by virtue of its being a government bill or even a private member's bill. It is a resolution and is an eminently fair and sensible one, I think.

One of my main reasons for supporting it is that I am opposed to monolithic cultures and I'm opposed to monolithic educational systems in this day and age when we hope to break down certain curtains that divide parts of the world and peoples of the world, when we hope to break down and penetrate some of the barriers that keep us apart. I submit that monolithic institutions work to the disadvantage and all too often to the harm of the values which I think every culture represented in this Legislature and every culture represented in this province

August 13, 1970 ~~·-::-c--::'7£~ -;:: - ; (MR. SHERMAN cont'd,) •.••. hold dear. My position is basically one of being oppuied- to monolithic juggernauts in the area of institutions such as educational programs and edUcational mechanisms. MR. MACKLING: I wonder if the member will answer a question? Will you answer a question? M!t. SHERMAN: Yes. MR.

MACKLING: Is it your opinion that someone can vote in the affirmative on the resolution as amended without in any way indicating a final decision in respect to the principles involved in the resolution inasmuch as apparently you alluded to the wording, "consider the advisability of", are you of the view therefore, that this means that that person is willing to take a fresh look at this whole question without being in any way bound to any particular posi tion? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, that is precisely my view but I don't s~st that it should be the Attorney-General's or anyone else's but it is precisely my view.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to speak on this resolution. It's one I've had con- siderable difficulty with over the years in discussing, deciding in my own mind about, and ;"- probably having had some exposure to the problems that are involved I think perhaps I've given it more thought, although I'm not suggesting in _any way that my judgment is any better than anybody else's. The argument that we're faced with is one that is more emotional than it is logical be cause you can mount extremely logical arguments on both sides of the question.

If you do that you're almost bound to end up being able to appreciate both sides of it and this can create a bit of a dilemma. Now, I think the strongest argument against the resolution is the fact that although religion is very important to us and very important that it be taught to our children, I think it's generally accepted that beyond a point, religious teaching is not education but becomes indoctrination and this is a very valid argument, Mr. Speaker.

It's one that mounts a very strong argument against the support then, of putting your school system in the hands of a religious organization rather than simply allowing in your curriculum the teaching of religion in the schools. Now I think there's solid argument for saying that the teaching of religion in a school should be restricted to a course in comparative religion.

I think that's a valid argument providing this is well done and so you could look at that side of the argument and say that if religious teaching is indoctrination beyond a point, then there is no need to teach in our schools anything but basics of the religions and preferably to put forth the point of view of more than one religion. So if you wanted to cut off your thinking at that point, Mr. Speaker, you could come up with a sound argument fully justified.

This,of course, is the argument that has been presented for a long time, although lt may not have been the real reason why v.-e have the situation that we do. I would think it would be more realistic to suggest that people hide their emotional argument for and against religion in schools, behind an argument such as this, because I think then, on the other side, you have to turn and look at what is the fact of life in Manitoba. Have we excluded putting financial aid from the state into the hands of religious organizations to run their schools?

I think this is one point that has probably escaped almost everybody that has looked at this question.

The fact of the matter is that probably the major ity of the children receiving education through schools which somehow come under the admini stration of religious orders, the majority of the children receiving the education are receiving it now through the public school system v.bether members of the Legislature realize it or not, because we have now probably three or four public school divisions that fall under that cate gory and where the teaching of religion is carried on by members of the religious order to which they belong, religious organization, and therefore we've been turning a blind eye to the fact that it has been going on all the time and we've chosen to ignore it rather than to accept lt. --(Interjection)-- Yes, that's right.

MR. PAULLEY: Under blind eye. You admitted it. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I choose not to allow this to become an emotional argument let me say ... MR. PAULLEY: No, It's not emotion; you stated a fact. JIR. CRAIK: Let me say, Mr. Speaker. it was going on certainly under my tenure of

4668 August 13, 1970 (MR. CRAIK cont'd. ). . the office of the Department of Education. but it's been going on probat)ly for four or five d~cades l!lld through a great number of administrations in the Province of Manitoba ... MR. PAULLEY: There's none so blind as those that won't see. MR. CRAIK: It wasn't begun under any particular administration that I can put IllY finger on. Those are the facts Mr.

Speaker, in the situation. · I can go back to being first initiated in this situation and the controversy that can be created, where at one time as a Member of the School Board and Chairman of it, and therefore carrying generally the full brunt of a confrontation regarding transportation, I found myself in much the same position that the Member for St.

Boniface elaborated to us last night, with phone calls to my house and to my family. people on the doorstep, etcetera) and if you don't think that emotions can get high on the topic - lf you think they can get high on the topic of public automobile insurance, let me tell you they can get equally as high or higher on the topic of aid to schools. So with that baptism into the controversy and the ensuing years, I think I've had a good time to digest probably both sides of the argument. Well, at the present time, Mr.

Speaker, the situation is that although you may not agree with the principle of religion in schools on the basis that it is indoctrination rather than educa tion, you have to face the fact that it has been going on not only in the public school system, but that the private school system which has carried on on its own, a method \\ilich in fact I prefer and would hope that they could contime apart from thei.r very severe financial difficulties, the fact of the matter is that the private schools with the escalation in costs in education that have gone on, are at the point of going broke.

In fact, many have gone broke and have folded up and have been absorbed by the public school system.

So really you have to ask yourself the question as to \\hether or not you want the private school system to disappear, because they are going to disappear and they're going to disappear very rapidly now if they do not get some form of support. --(Interjection)-- Well, if you're going to mount that argument that they should disappear, then what are you going to do about the people \\ho have such a respect for the operation of the private system that they're pre pared to send their children to those schools, yet they're not prepared to in any way support the concept of aid to the private schools?

I think, again, Mr. Speaker, even if it is repetitious, I think we have to state the practical facts of life, that the status quo at the present time is that the private schools have been doing a good business. I don't support the principle of financial aid to them in basic terms because I feel that it's in their best interests to carry on on their o\\n but I realize they can't. and I sincerely state that, that I believe that they're going to fold up now because of the financial crisis. I don't believe they should pack it up; I believe they've done a good job.

A- testimony to it is their enrolment which comes not from those interested alone from a parti san religious point of view, but from the fact that they're respected in the community and are adhered to and there are so many people send their children there that have taken them out of the public system and I do not often believe that it's in the interests of Manitoba for this to happen.

So with this tacit statement, I'm saying that I believe the government should r;ive con sideration to it; I do not support the idea in saying this of propagating a second bureaucracy, but I do believe ln the concept of plurality in the school system, providing the public system ls not weakened. Mr. Speaker we know now that the public system is not going to be weakened; It's not in the same state that it was ten years ago, twenty years ago; it's gone through. a strong reorganization. The public system is strong. It's not going to be weakened. With those qualifications, Mr.

Speaker, and with some reservations, I must say that I'm prepared to support the government taking under consideration the advisability of a form of support, on the proviso again that we're not propagating a second bureaucracy and a second set of opera tions in the province, but whether it operates \\ithin the public system or the grants are made on some sort of specific basis, or I suppose simply to go back to the initial wording of the resolution here, would find my support. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Charleswood. MR. MOUG: Mr.

Speaker, I realize the debate is being prolonged on this resolution, and everybody is waiting to get out. I had something prepared to say, I'm going to forego that to expedite the business of the House and say that I rise to support the resolution. MR. SPEAKER: The Honwrable Member for Rhineland.

August 13, 19'10 4669 MR. FROESE: Mr. Speaker, I will not make any lengthy speech which normally ..• All I want to do is ask the honourable members for support of the resolution and hope that the government wlll take early action. MR. SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion ca'rried. MR. PAULLEY: Yeas and nays, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Has the Honourable Minister support? MR. PAULLEY: Well, I should hope so. MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members. Order please. Order. A STANDING VOTE was taken, . the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs.

Allard, Barkman, Beard, Borowski, Claydon, Craik, Desjardins, Einarson, Enns, Froese, Girard, Gonick, Gottfried, Graham, .Hardy, G. Johnston, Jorgenson, McBryde, McGill, McGregor, McKellar, McKenzie, Mackllng, Malinowski, Molgat, Moug, Patrick, Pawley, Schreyer, Shafransky, Sherman, Spivak, Toupin, TurDbnll, Usklw and Mrs. Trueman. NAYS: Messrs. Barrow, Boyce, Cherniack, Doern, Evans, Ferguson, Fox, Green, Henderson, Jenkins, Johannsen, Miller, Paulley, Petursson and Uruskl. MR. CLERK: Yeas 36; Nays 15. MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion as amended carried. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, if I may.

I don't want to infringe on the rules of the House but I wonder whether the decorum of the House permits a member without shoes to vote. I understand that one of the honourable members is barefoot as the result of some thievery or something like that. I refer to the Honourable Member for Emerson, who is un shod. MR. GABRIEL GmARD (Emerson): ... on the same point of order. The honourable member said awhile ago that he had the guts to vote, and so do I. MR. PAULLEY: Had the guts, eh? I'm talking about shoes, not guts. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, on a point of order, I wonder ifl could have leave of the House to file a Return to an Order of the House which I have just received. MR. SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed) MR. CHERNIACK: Then I file Return to an Order of the House No. 2 on motion of the Honourable Member for Assinlboia. MR. SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Souris-Killarney. MR. McKELLAR: I just want to say a word on this amendment. I cannot support this amendment for many reasons.

I consider the agricultural situation in the Province of Mani toba so serious to the farmers; many farmers are going to be in real trouble this year, and I don't consider that the Minister of Agriculture did everything that he could possibly do to assist these people in their problems; and for that .. very reason I intend to vote against this amendment. MR. SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. lEONARD A. BARKMAN (La Verendrye): Yeas and nays please, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members. A STANDING VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs.

Allard, Barrow, Borowski, Boyce, Chernlack, Doern, Evans, Fox, Gonick, Gottfried, Green, Jenkins, Johannsen, McBryde, Mackllng, Malinowski, Miller, Paulley, Pawley, Petursson, Schreyer, Shafransky, Toupin, Turnbull, Uruski, and Usklw. NAYS: Messrs. Barkman, Beard, Bilton, Claydon, Craik, Einarson, Ferguson, Girard, Graham, Hardy, Henderson, G. Johnston, McGill, McGregor, McKellar, McKenzie, Molgat, Moug, Patrick, Sherman, Spivak and Mrs. Trueman. MR. CLERK: Yeas 26; Nays 22. MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion as amended carried. MR. FROESE: Mr. Speaker, I was paired with the Honourable Member for St. Boniface.

Had I voted I would have voted in the negative. MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed resolution of the Honourable Member for Assiniboia, and the proposed amendment of the Honourable Minister of Labour in amendment thereto, and the proposed amendment of the Honourable Member for Riel in further amendment thereto. The Honourable Member for Kildonan.

4670 August 13, 1970 MR. PETER FOX (Kildonan): Mr .. Speaker, I'll be very brief. We as the government have no problem with thls resolution as in .the proposed amended form. Therefore we'll accept it. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the sub-amendment and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. · MR. SPEAKER put the question on the amendment and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the motion as amended and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR.

SPEAKER: On the proposed resolution of the Honourable Member for Churchill and the proposed amendment of the Honourable Mlnlster of Mines and Natural Resources in amendment thereto. The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to speak very briefly on this because I wanted to add one point to the amendment that was added by the Mlnlster of Mines and Natural Resources, and the sub-amendment is to ensure that the community of the Town of Churchill itself is directly involred in the proceedings that go on.

So if that's prefaced, I would move, seconded by the Honourable Member for River Heights, that the amendment be further amended by adding after Clause (4) the following: ''That this government direct the Churchill Local Government Administrator and his Advisory Council to call for an election of a local Churchill committee at a public meeting immediately, to assure that the people of Churchill will be in volved in the negotiations between senior governments on the future of Churchill." MR. SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. MR. GREEN: Well Mr.

Chairman, we just cannot support that type of amendment. First of all, it presumes that we can direct the Town of Churchlll to call a meeting, an open meeting, and elect delegates. It's not our prerogatit'e to tell those people how to handle their affairs. I can assure the Honourable Member for Riel that the normal provincial government-Municipalllaisons wlll be used in whatever is occurring, but I don't think that it is incumbent upon the government to be bound by a special resolution on special proposals for election.

In the last analysis, the Provincial Government must be responsible for what is occurring, certainly. Certainly what we will do in any decisions which will be made will be contingent upon there being some liaison and some involvement of the people in Churchill. I don't know v.by they would have to have a special committee. They do have a local Advisory Committee within the setup in accordance with the normal principles under v.hich Local Government Districts operate, and Mr.

Speaker, it's our intention to make sure that the local residents are considered, consulted and involved, but we don't think that that should be a special resolution added to what the government has proposed. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. BEARD: In considering the amendment and, I suppose, the sub-amendment, Mr. Speaker, I must agree with the suggestion of the addition of people from Churchill to help negotiate with senior governments on the future for Churchill.

Too many plans already have been made in Northern Manitoba without considering the wishes of the people of Northern Manitoba nor considering the conditions in the communities of Northern Manitoba, and this is very important, and it has caused in many cases a great deal of loss of confidence in I{Overnment when they come through with programs or plans which are not acceptable to the people of the community whatsoever.

In fact, Churchill is a prime example; the last time as important a thing as the water and sewer program for the community came in, they were asked to look at it and consider it and give their answer within just a few hours. This is the Advisory Council, and they went on T.V. and supposedly sold it to the people of Churchill within a half an hour.

If you wanted to reminisce a wee bit, you would say that this happened again at The Pas v.bere Cabinet went, had made all the plans, put a program into effect and then went up and, between planes, sold it to the Mayor and Council of The Pas, and came away with their signature and in fact did not give them time to look into the whole aspect of what would be involved really in the future of that part of their area and how it would affect them financially. Well you may say it's not so, but ... MR. GREEN: Would the honourable member permit a question?

Is the honourable member aware that the Mayor of The Pas went with the Provincial Government officials to meet with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion and was there during the discussions

August 13, 1970 (KB. GREEN cont'd). . ·on his area? Went with the Provincial Government delegations to Ottawa, sat in the room when I was there with the federal officials and us whlle The Pas pro--· posal was being discussed? MR. BEARD: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources has not gone back in history as far as I was going back in history. MR. GREEN: Well, I'm talking about this government and the new project in The Pas. MR. BEARD: No. I'm sorry. I didn't make myself clear.

I was going to bring into effect by referring to where, at the Narthern Task Force, the Mayor admitted that he had signed the contract with his eyes closed and they had not had enough time to consider the whole planning in the Town of The Pas.

Now, in the negotiating between the Federal Government and the Provincial Government in respect to the Town of The Pas, certainly there have been changes and certainly there have been indications, but the indications, as has been roughly indicated by the First Minister, have been well accepted in the community, but certainly there's no indica tion to them as to what really is in store for them, and it is only half of the program, the development.

They don't even know whether it's going to be a grant system or v.hether it is going to have to be repayable and whether lt's going to be added on to their tax system, and so they may find some morning that again they have woken up and found that their Advisory Council or, worse still, the Local Government Admlni~..rator has . . . MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I hate interrupting my honourable friend the Member for Churchill. At this stage in the proceedings it is rather difficult to know the purport of amend ments that are introduced and I do wish to raise a point of order, Mr.

Speaker, on the sub stance of the amendment proposed by the Honourable Member for Riel and I question whether or not the amendment as proposed by the Member for Riel is in order, and . . . Mr. Speaker, may I indicate to you , Sir, that v.hat the amendment proposed by the Honourable Member for Riel purports to do is to reinstitute something that the amendment by the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources eliminated in his amendment to the main motion, and may I, Sir, refer to the Resolution No. 20.

The Honourable the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources moved an amendment to that originally proposed by the Honourable the Member for Churchill, \\hich deleted these words: "And Be It Further Resolved that this government direct the Churchill Local Govern ment Administrator and his Advisory Council to call for an election of such a committee and a publlc meeting immediately, so that the people of Churchlll can be assured of being involved in all such meetings." And the sub-amendment now proposed by the Honourable Member for Riel reads as follows: ''That this government direct the Local Government Admlnlstrator and his Advisory Council to call for an election of a local Churchill committee," which is identical to the words that were eliminated by the amendment proposed by the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources, "to assure that the people of Churchill will be involved in the negotiations between the senior governments in the future of Churchill.

" I respectfully suggest, Mr.

Speaker, that the contents of the sub-amendment of the Honourable Member for Riel, instead of proposing a new proposition in effect- and of course that's what sub-amendments are for - is really attempting to reinstitute at this particular time the position or the substance of the amendment as proposed by the Honourable the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources which did delete, but now the Honourable Member for Riel is trying to bring in, back into the resolution, and the proper procedure for my honourable friend the Member for Riel is to see what the outcome may be of the amendment. proposed by the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources.

And I'm sure, Mr. Speaker, that my honourable friend the former Speaker, the Member for Swan River, would agree with the point that I am now raising. I know the hour is too late but let's be parliamentary correct, even at this stage in the game. ::ontinued on next page

46'12 August 13, 19JQ MR. SPEAKER (MR. FOX): ()rder plea~. The ChaU" must say that it's in .a very difficult position not having the amendment before it, but I would rule on this matter to this extent that if the amendment or the sub-amendment is contrary to the motion, then it would be .out of order, and this is the purport I got from the Minister of Labour, that it's exactly the opposite of what the amendment said. MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, something may have been caught in the deletion which the :Minister of Mines and Natural Resources made with his amendment, but the amendment that I'm making is really not all that great import compared to the four items he has here. I thought pos sibly that this motion would be something that the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources would want to have in here and was added. Now, probably, Mr. Speaker, to solve the difficulty, the easiest thing to do is-- I don't really think that we're out of order on this. The Minister of Labour may have a technicality here. I think it's questionable.

I think earlier today we had an amendment, the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources' amendment on the first Private Mem bers' Resolution was out of order too. --(Interjection) -- Oh yes it was. It's deleted. No. But, however, we won't bring it up now. I didn't bring it up at that time •.•• MR. GREEN: You surely can't reflect on a judgment of the Speaker that was made, after argument that was given, that it was in order. I think it's not in order to say that it was out of order. MR.

CRAIK: Well, let me just say the reason that I didn't bring it up on the first is that we wanted to get the thing finished and we'd have been in a procedural hassle if I had brought it up, so I suggest that you let the thing go, put the question and let two wrongs make a right today. -- (Interjection) -- MR. BILTON: Well, I've never won one with the Minister of Labour yet so I'm not going to try tonight. MR. SPEAKER (MR. FOX): The Chair finds itself in a very difficult position at this moment.

Having tried to determine the pros and cons of it, I ,..-ould suggest that if I take this under advisement we could proceed with other business of the House. MR. BEARD: Speaking on the point of order, and you can "aw" all you want but it's im portar.t to me, I think that probably I could see possibly where the Minister of Government Services is right. It's putting it back in the original motion and I suppose that the easiest way is to-- by winning a vote and by voting out the amendment would do it.

No, by defeating tbe amendment, would it not -the original amendment -if we defeated the original amendment, then that in effect puts it back into the original resolution. I would rather have that done, Mr. Speaker, than you take it under advisement, because that's just giving it a six months hoist. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, if I may, the other way, as I understand it, would be for the honourable member to ask leave to withdraw his amendment. Then, if this amendment proposed by the Honourable Minister of Mines and Resources passes, then I believe he could move his amendment.

Is that right? --(Interjection) --No? Well, okay, that's the answer. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, then I think the proper procedure here is that, even though the parties, the two parties that brought this up have earlier today done similarly, I'm going to withdraw it or ask leave to withdraw it. MR. SPEAKER: Member have leave? (Agreed) MR. BEARD: Well, thank you, then, Mr. Speaker. I'll carry on from where I stopped. I won't start all over again but I have not spoken to the amendment. MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Churchill. MR. BEARD: No, that's the sub-amendment.

As I understand, the Member for Riel has withdrawn his sub-amendment and I'm speaking on the amendment. Is that right? MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I interrupted the Honourable the Member for Churchill when he was in effect speaking on a proposed sub-amendment, and it wasn't until after con templation that it was considered out of order and I don't think the honourable member used up his right to speak, as he should now be entitled to on the amendment, and I would suggest he carry on. MR. BEARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It would save time if you will accept what I said on the sub-amendment as applying to the amendment, then we can close fairly quickly. As far as the amendment is concerned, I really have no axe to grind in the last part of it. He says, "refuses to acknowledge". There's no argument; it's just a change of attack and he is saying "has not acknowledged" -the government has not acknowledged. In the second one, I suppose I have taken the negative approach in that there has never been any indication of any working

August 13, 19'70 . ~ . (MR. BEARD cont'd.). • agreement between governmev,t, and he says that there iS re- quired a demonstration between the two governments. And the third was the "fnabiU.ty'' iD the . first line and he has changed that to .. failure". Now, those working agreements are fine but, in effect, what he has done is left out the right, or any way in which the people of Churchill through this resolution can be assured of working with government, and it's unfortunate that this government is not close enough to the people of Churchill to know that iis has been the problem.

You can talk about the question if you want but I would suggest that you go out for another cup of coffee if that's the case. It's a problem with Churchil1 and I think that they deserve the last few moments on this even if it is our last day. (If you antagonize me it'll be a 40 minute delay.) But the problem is that there is no way that the people can get in between the two govern ments negotiating on their awn future, and I say to you that this never takes place in any other area of Manitoba except in a Local Government Distric~.

It's a terrible way to operate and I am sure that the Minister of Transportation is going to support this resolution because he has supported the idea behind the very fact that people have to be involved in their awn community and elected people have to be involved. -- (Interjection) --I would agree, but we can't expeCt to go too far, I guess, at once.

If the government will take this under consideration and find ways and means of involving at least the Advisory Council before the plan is agreed to, so that from time to time they consult with the Advisory Council, they give the Advisory Council weeks or a month or whatever would be necessary to see what the people want, and then I think you'll find that there's a closer working agreement and there's a friendliness that will grow between the community and the Government of Manitoba, which certainly is not evident today and this has been growing for years.

It's been buck-passing between two governments, and in between you find the lives of many thousands of people involved.

Inasmuch as most of them are govern ment employees, they are then caught just that much closer because they can't really make too much noise about it or else they just could be walking that thin line, and so I would hope that we can get this point across to the people in government and say to them, particularly in Municipal Affairs, that as you come to some decisions on what government is going to consider for the area of Churchil1, that you certainly do not do it in secrecy but convey your ideas to the com munity of Churchill and ask for their cooperation and ask for their advice, and I can't see why this has to be turned down, why it has to be so secret really, and the best people to try it ant on is the people who are going to be involved in the program itself.

With those words, Mr .Chairman, I will sit down and hope that government will in fact make sure that the Advisory Council and the people of Churchill ·are involved in the future of Churchill before the decisions are made. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the amendment and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER put the question on the motion as amended and after a voice vote declared the motion as amended carried. MR. SPEAKER: The proposed resolution of the Honourable Member for Roblin. The Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre. MR. BUD BOYCE (Winnipeg Centre): Mr.

Speaker, this motion has been standing in my name for about three mmths, and if anybody really insists I'll give the 40-minut.e speech that I have prepared. Seriously, I adjourned this for the Minister of Transportation. HON. JOSEPH P. BOROWSKI (Minister of Transportation)(Thompsm): I think I shou1d take a minute to explain why we can't support it. I believe there's a bill in Ottawa called C-137- it's such a long time since I looked at it -but it seems to me Ottawa is dealing with this problem and until they pass legislation it's quite pointless for us to have such a law m the books.

We don't manufacture any tires in Manitoba. I think Alberta is the closest place that has a manu facturing plant for tires, and till legislation is passed federally, it is pointless. So therefore, Mr. Speaker, we are going to vote against this resolution. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I'm just concerned here.

The wording of it is such that it doesn't put the onus on the government to adopt it but urges them to adopt it, and I think that by adopting the resolution it leaves it open to you that if federal action is taken, then you have the blessing of the Legislature to support any federal openings that are provided for yon. MR. BOROWSKI: Mr. Speaker, may I just say if I for a moment thought ••••• MR. SPEAKER: I believe the Honourable Minister has ..•.• MR. BOROWSKI: I'm answering a question.

4674 August 13, 1970 MR. CHERNIACK: :Mr. Speaker, you know, the mere fact that it's worded peculiarly doesn't make it right, and it is worded peculiarly because we can't really vote to adopt a system which we have no capacity to do, but certainly the Honourable the Minister of Transportation has indicated that be supports the principle and will continue to promote it in his dealings with Ottawa. MR. SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion lost. MR. CRAIK: Ayes and Nays, Mr. Speaker, please. MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members.

A STANDING VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs. Barkman, Bilton, Claydon, Craik, Einarson, Ferguson, Girard, Hardy, Henderson, Jorgenson, McGill, McKellar, McKenzie, Moug, Patrick, Sherman, Spivakand Mrs. TrUeman. NAYS: Messrs. Allard, Barrow, Borowski, Boyce, Burtniak, Cherniack, Doern, Evans, Fox, Gonick, Gottfried, Green, Jenkins, Johannson, G. Johnston (Portage la Prairie), McBryde, Maclding, Malinowski, Miller, Molgat, Paulley, Pawley, Petursson, Schreyer, Shafransky, Toupin, Turnbull, Uskiw and Uruski. MR. CLERK: Yeas 18; Nays 29. MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion lost.

On the proposed resolution of the Honourable House Leader of the Liberal Party. The Honourable Member for Kildonan. MR. FOX: Mr. Speaker, I'll be very brief. This is a complicated proposition that is be ing considered here, but the government finds no problem in the advisability of considering it at this time • We '11 accept. MR. SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: The proposed resolution of the Honourable Member for Osborne. The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I do not wish to speak on this resolution except, Sir, to say that I'm opposed to it. MR. SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: The proposed resolution of the Honourable Member for Crescentwood. MR. GONICK: Mr. Speaker, I have a 40-minute address but in view of these circum- stances, I'm going to ask leave to have the resolution withdrawn. (Agreed) MR. SPEAKER: The proposed resolution of the Honourable House Leader of the Liberal Party. MR. GORDON E. JOHNSTON (Portage la Prairie): In view of the circumstances, Mr.

Speaker, I would ask leave to withdraw the motion. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, might I ask my honourable friend, what are the circum- stances? MR. G. JOHNSTON: Because there's more heat and less light than ever in this Chamber. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please . MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, if I may, may I address my colleague, the Minister of Government Services. It is usual that following the attendance of His Honour, that certain activities take place. May I respectfully suggest, in order to protect the property of Her Majesty that everybody turns their microphones down as low as they can be.

They're rather costly to replace. I'm not suggesting anything should happen, but preserve our property will you please? MR. SPEAKER: May it please your Honour, the Legislative Assembly, at its present liession, passed several Bills, which in the name of the Assembly, I present to Your Honour and to which Bills I respectfully request Your Honour's Assent. MR. DEPUTY CLERK: No. 17 - The Manitoba Natural Resources Development Act. No. 39- The Municipal Act. No. 43 -

An Act to amend The Legislative Assembly Act. No. 56 - The Automobile Insurance Act. No. 87 - The Manitoba Dental Services Corporation Act. No. 109- The Dental Mechanics Act. No. 121- The Human Rights Act. No. 134- AnAct to amend The Election Act (2). No. 139-

An Act to amend The Landlord and Tenant Act.

~ ,_-..,-- August 13, 1970 4675 MR. CLERK: In Her Majesty's name, His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor doth assent to these Bills. HONOURABLE RICHARDS. BOWLES, Q.C. (Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Manitoba): Mr. Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly: The work of the Second Session of the Twenty-ninth Legislature has now been completed. I wish to commend the Mem bers for their faithful attention to their duties including many hours devoted to consideration of Bills and Estimates, both in the House and in Committees.

I convey to you my appreciation of your concern for the public interest and for the general welfare of our Province. I thank you for providing the necessary sums of money for carrying on the public business. It will be the intention of my Ministers to ensure that these sums will be expended with both efficiency and economy by all departments of the government.

In relieving you now of your present duties and declaring the Second Session of the Twenty ninth Legislature prorogued, I give you my best wishes z..nd pray that under the guidance of Divine Providence, our Province may continue to provide the things which are necessary for the health, the happiness and the well-being of all our people. MR. MACKLING: It is the will and pleasure of His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, that this Legislative Assembly be prorogued until it shall please His Honour to summon the same for the dispatch of business, and the Legislative Assembly is accordingly prorogued.

INDEX FOR HANSARD TO FOLLOW l.i

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	29-2-178
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	29th 2nd hansardpdf 178.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	40a44ce29533df9bba807cd7a52dd54bce0618c5

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