LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, 17 July, 1986. Time - 8:00 p.m. CON CURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - ENVIRONMENT AND WORKPL ACE SAFETY AND HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: Committee will come to order. We are reconven ing. We are dealing with the Environment and Workplace Safety and Health Estimates, Page 68, Resolution 63, No. 2. Environmental Management - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to welcome everybody back after a very pleasant supper hour . I see that we're a little bit more casual this evening.

Some of us have removed our ties and our jackets. I think this is an indication that we're going to get right down to work this evening, and no fooling around. Environmental Management, the first item under Resolution 63 consists of activities intended to prevent environmental health hazards and to prevent safety hazards in public places. I thank the Minister for providing me with this particular information because, as I mentioned before, it is quite helpful and I'd like to proceed in that regard. In the Environmental Control Services, which is Item (a)

(1) Salaries, it's environmental control program, inspection services, and pesticides. Radiation protect ion services are provided under contract by the Manitoba Cancer Tre atment and Research Foundation. So it's a pretty wide area that we've just entered into. I wonder if the Honourable Minister could just bring us up to date a little bit on the department that covers health hazards, the type of inspections.

I know that he gave us a pretty fair outline before, but the type of inspection that looks after these health hazards, the control that we have on the health hazards, how health hazards are reported through the Workplace Safety, and how they are counteracted or how they're looked after when health hazards are reported. Before we go on - if the Minister would start on that, then I would have some more questions concerning that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister. HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr . Chairman, first of all ... MR. A. KOVNATS: Excuse me, before you carry on, I just thought of what the other one was.

Concerning the union representatives that are sent in to work with the Workplace Safety, what is that group? Does that not come under this particular aspect? HON. G. LECUYER: No, we're strictly on environmental controls here. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm not talking about Workers Compensation. HON. G. LECUVER: I realize that, but this refers to the Wo rkpl ace Safety and Health and we're now on Environmental Controls.

If I cou ld briefly mention some of the ongoing functions which took place, for instance, under that heading of Inspections, for instance, for 1985-86, in the area of food control, although the Public Health Inspection . . . there were some 6,356 inspections carried out in this area having to do with food service establishments, caterers, food processors, retail food operations, etc. Water Control Program, which incl udes public, private, municipal water supplies,

interpretation of analysis, sampling and complaints: 8,2 18 inspections there. Under the Environmental Control Program, which includes private sewage dispo sal systems, waste disposal grounds, livestock operations and complaints related thereto: 4,859 inspections. Under the Sanitation Program, which includes bathing premises, camps, public acco mmodations and complaints related to rental accommodations and insan itary conditions: 4, 967 inspections in tha t particular regard. In the area of the Communicable Disease Program, which includes food borne, water borne and other communicable disease investigations: 311.

The Intergovernmental Services Program, which includes inspectional activities related to subdivisions and land splits, Clean Environment Commission orders and assessment, day care facili ties, li aison with municipal corporations, and response to requests from other departments and agencies: 4,200 in that area. That, briefly, gives you a total

summary of the inspections that were carried on under these various programs. MR. A. KOVATS: I really didn't want to get down to the nitty-gritty in numbers. it's important, but I think what I would like is an overall picture because, really, what we're doing is we're reporting your department to every body and they'll be able to see this, so I'm really giving you the opportun ity to report your department. When it comes down to health inspections, what type of health inspections do we have particularly in the City of Winnipeg? I would imagine that it includes the restaurants and the facilities in restaurants.

I know that there's a Department of Health through the City of Winnipeg, but do we control that Department of Health or do we supervise that Department of Health, or do we just give the resp onsibility of anything of that factor , turn it over to the Health Department? Let 's say that we had an episode of Legionnaire's Disease at some banquet. What would your department do? Would it come under the Health Department, or wouldn't that be under Environment? 1922

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 HON. G. LECUYER: Under the Public Health, which at one time was dir ected under the Department of Health, we would do those things that the member refers to in regard to the province and the suburbs of Winnipeg, but the core area, the City of Winnipeg does its own health inspections. We would cooperate with them upon request, but they have jurisdiction in that particular area as far as food establishments in the core area. MR. A. KOVNATS: What happens in the rural areas, in small towns wh ere there's probably more danger of health hazards in food? I'm just guessing because I'm not sure.

I don't know what type of inspection we have out there and what type of control. Do we have a regular inspection of small restaurants in rural areas? What type of incidences do we have of them being brought under control where there are misdemeanours, where there's food of greater bacterial count than there should be? HON. G.

LECUYER: Under the Food Control Program, or under the Sanitation Program, there are ongoing inspections that are carried out. lt means that we, of course, don't go - we haven't got the resources, nor I expect could it be possible that we would go there, for instance, into every one of those on a weekly basis. lt's done, of course, on a priority basis where food is bandied in the first place, and that would apply to restaurants which would be higher up on the priority because they could dir ectly impact on the health of clients.

Yes, the province is divided into six regions, and there are, outside of Winnipeg, 30 inspectors. MR. A. KOVNATS: Ok ay. Also, sanitation in bathing premises, campgrounds, public and central acc ommodation, conducting invest igations with respects to food borne, water borne, and other commun icable dis eases, In the Department of Highways, I had occasin to mention to the Minister that there was a wayside station about five miles east of Pansy Road and No. 12 Highway. I had mentioned it to the Minister of Highways and I thought that maybe something might get done about it.

I thought that maybe he might have even reported it because the sanitary condi tions in a location lik e that were absolutely atrocious. I would think that it would come unde r, from what I read here as to the duties of your department, I would think that it would come under your duties.

Now this is where tourists coming into the province, and I'm bringing in a great big mixture, but this is where tourists come into the province and it's probably one of the first encounters that they have with our province is one of these roadside stations that doesn't have running water but it certainly has toilet facilities, and I would think tha t ther e's got to be some commitment. Who looks after it? Do we rely on the Department of Highways to look after it? Do they pick up the garbage that's left there?

I know that there was garbage left there and somebody had picked it up because I was there one week after the other and the garbage pickup had been. But I'l l you I would certainly look for some better accommodations as far as the toilet facilities are concerned. I'm not asking the Minister to go up there and clean out the toil et facilities but 1 think that there's got to be some safeguard to see that these accommodations are kept in half-decent shape so that we can promote tourism, promote every thing including a clean envi ronment. Will the Min ister comment on that? HON. G.

LECUYER: I believe it's the Department of Highways that is respon sible for the operation of these and indeed the inspection of these comes under our department, Obvious ly, as I said before, we certainly don't have the resources to be there on the spot on a daily basis and conditions may change. Oftentimes when it's in what I would refer to as a secondary area, as opposed to our priority areas, which would be first of all the food establishments; oftentimes they receive less frequent inspections, but if there are complaints we would certainly respond immediately to a complaint.

If the member knows of a specific instance, sure I would hope that he would mention it, draw it to my attention; I would look into it. MR. A. KOVNA TS: Yes, this is a specific instance. I happened to be returning from picking blueberries out at Menisino and this location just happens to be close, and I had no place of getting rid of my garbage from out in that location. There's not too many pl aces along the highway where you can put garbage, under control, whether they have these orbits or things.

But there was a location at this place and I can't quite accept the Minister's answer that it was the responsibility of the Department of Highways because the Department of Highways Minister would not accept any respon sibilit ies. He suggested that it belonged to somebody else. This is kind of an odd situation because we can't just throw our hands up in the air and say it's somebody else's respon sibil ity. As again I repeat, I'm not asking the Minister to go out and clean it up but there has to be some facilities for cleaning it up and I would hope that these things would be looked after . HON. G.

LECUYER: As I've said, Mr . Chairman, my response was not intended to be interpreted as passing the buck. What I'm saying is we'r e not respo nsible for the operat ion, and it could be, depending on the particular location here that this comes under the Parks Branch or Natural Resources which is resp onsible for parks. Again, I say I would have to get the specifics to be able to assess.

We 're responsible to see that they abide by the regulations in force and it's in that respect that I say we're not respon sible for operating the program or the park, if that's what it is, but we're certainly responsible to see that they operate within the regulations. If they are not complying with the regulations, that's where we would intervene. That's why I say, again, if the member is aware of a particular incidence, let me know and we'll look into it. MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes, it's the location five miles east on Highway No. 12 from Pansy Road. lt's just a small wayside station.

Actually there are two facilities there, one for men and one for women, and it seems kind of odd that the men's facility should be half-decently clean and it's the women's facility that's in the condition that I just mentioned. 1923

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 If the Minister would just kind of look after it because I wouldn't want to see any of our tourists discouraged from coming into Canada and thinking that all wayside stations are similar to that. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, now that we've got the coordina tes, we'll look into it. The member can appr eciate that most tourists and people that use these facil ities act responsibly . Inasmuch as more and more people do that, these places will be kept clean and will be more receptive to tourism in the province.

I'm just a little bit curious to know what the Member for Niakwa was doing inspecting the ladies' washroom. MR. A. KOVNATS: Actually , I happened to be the only one in the location . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! A MEMBER: I thought I told you to stop doing that. HON. G. LECUYER: That's all right. I appreciate the fact that the member has carried on an inspection and can give us a report of the status of the facilities there. MR. A. KOVNATS: Actually , Mr. Chairman, it was an inspection of the location. I wanted to see what it was like.

I saw a pump there and I wanted to see whether water was available, and water was available. I couldn't tell you the cleanliness of the water. There were a couple of gopher holes there. These are all things that I made in the complete inspection. The window was out of the ladies' washroom, by the way. lt wasn't a glass one; it was just one of those wooden louvre windows. lt didn' t appear to be that bad. lt looked like it had been paint ed within the last year or two and really wasn't in that bad a shape. Let's get down to Water Supply Sources and Sewage Disposal.

We'll talk about the sewage disposal coming out of the city of Winnip eg. I know it's the res ponsibility of the City of Winnipeg, but we have made some complaints to them, and it is contaminating the water down-riv er. The Minister had told me that the Town of Selkirk had not used the water out of the Red River for drinking purposes for almost two years. I think it was just a year ago - I've got to get my stuff on this - I had asked the Minister some questions because there was an oil spill in Winnipeg and I had asked the Minister if there was any danger to the drinking water supply up at Selkirk, Manitoba.

My big concern was because this is the home of the First Minister and I wouldn't want him getting any complaints, particularly from any of his constituents. The Minister had told me that Selkirk, Manitoba had not taken any drinking water out of the Red River for at least two years. Then, on Tuesday, June 24, there was an

article in the Winnipeg Free Press which says, "Winnipeg Waste Irks Selkirk", and it names the chap who is the Selkirk supervisor of water, Andy Demetruk, said, "Winnip eg is in capable of stopp ing the il legal (lu mping of hazardous wastes into sewers". I know that he can't speak for Winnipeg , but he did say that Winn ipeg was incapable of dumping hazardous wastes into the sewers. What are we doing to control the dumping of hazardous waste into sew ers?

I know that it's very, very difficult to detect and it's quite a job, but there's got to be some way we do control the dumping of hazardous waste in the sewers. lt is getting into our water system which is, in fact, part of the drinking water system of Selkirk, Manitoba. Further on in the article, it says, "Selkirk draws 60 percent of its fresh water from the Red and the remainder comes from wells," which seems to dispel what the Honourable Minister had advised me. I'm not bringing him to task for telling me an untruth.

I'm sure that the Honourable Minister believed that the drinking water supply was never taken from the Red River, at least not for the last two years, for the Selkirk drinking water. I am now advised that 60 percent of the fresh water comes from the Red River and the remainder comes from wells. Can the Minister bring us up-to­ date as to the water supply at Selkirk, and the dumping of hazardous waste into the Red River that could contaminate. We can go a little bit further. There was an

article in the paper also about the contaminated water around the Selkirk area where people were fishing, and Selkirk claims to be the catfish capital, or trying to become the cat fish capital of the world. I was just wondering whether the contaminants that are going in the river will either eliminate Selkirk from being the catfish capital of the world, or reduce the opportunity of it being the catfish capital of the world. HON. G.

LECUYER: The Member for Niakwa has touched in a variety of areas under that broad question, some that relate to the new act, some that relate to the fact that Winnipeg, as the member knows, presently and has been, as far as I know even before the days that The Environment Act was enacted, been exempt in terms of effluence, sewage effl uence.

Also, the matters raised touch or relate to the legislation adopted last year in regard to hazardous goods. lt is certainly a fact that there's been a long-standing problem with the quality of the water by the time it leaves the limits of the City of Winnip eg as compared to the water quality as it comes into the limits of the City of Winn ipeg are quite different. Obvious ly, it's a problem which is also part of the reason why we believe it is of such importance to addr ess this on a priority basis.

To that effect , it touches upon the program to which I referred earlier in my remarks today, and that is the River Renewal Program. This is no quick-fix answer for this particular problem. it's not one that is easy to correct; it is a long-standing problem. lt is a very costly one to correct.

I think that already, during last year's Estimates, I was making reference to the fact that a study was under way which was being cost-shared with the City of Winn ipeg under which we contracted an engineering study to determine whether disinfection could be used as part of the treatment facilities at the south end treatment plant. That study, I am told, should be available to us within approxima tely a month's time. lt was scheduled to be ready in August of this year, so the results of that study should be made known to us in about a month's time. Having said that, I want to touch on a number of other issues.

In particular , the member referred to the use of blended water in Selkirk in 1985. I just want to correct one of the things the member said, because 1924

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 it's 60 percent well water blended with 40 percent from Red River water. I'm told that there was a period, depending on the level of the water table, it's in most years not used at all. During the year 1985 it was used on that basis, a 60-40 blend, 40 being the drawing from the Red River, for 12 days. During that period of time, staff from the Environment also, of course, monitor and take samples and have these analyzed on a daily basis so that we can ensu re that the quality of the water will not pose any problems to the health of citizens who depend upon it.

Having said that, as much as if I were a resident of Selkirk, and I know that they've been objecting to this kind of water quality which is not of their making, generally , the problem in regard to the catfish that the member refers to was a problem related with the Selkirk sewage supply because of a breakdown there. That happens periodically and authorization is given so that they can make the repair . Of course, that puts an extra load on the water that flows by.

The main problem in regard to the water quality as it affects Selkirk is one that comes from Winnipeg, and there's no doubt abou t that. it's one that has to be corrected here in Winnipeg. From that standpoint, as I said, the River Renewal Program, the hazardous waste disposal through a Waste Management Corporation Program, which is under way, becau se much of these hazardous wastes, it's very difficult to control. As I repotted befo re, a good percentage of that presently goes into our sewage and our landfill and, hopefully , that will be corrected once there is such a facility in place.

As well, under The Clean Environment Act, which will be tabled at the end of this Session for discussion purposes in the inter-Session, the member will have an opportunity to comment and input on that. We hope to, as I mentioned earlier today, not only correct or addr ess situations where pollu tants are found in the environment but to bring about a situation where we can, through a preventative approach, be able to preve nt the problems before we have to addr ess them in a retrospect way.

As I say, that does not in any way give you a satisfactory answer to the point where because I gave you the answer the problem is corrected - it doesn't satisfy me either - but all I can say is these are measures which are very concrete, which we are at the present time putting in place, which hopefully will overcome over - and I repeat this - over a lengthy period of time because it's not one of those that can be corrected in short order. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Maybe I am jumping to some conclusions, but when the Honourable Minister was suggesting The Hazardou s Waste Management Act will correct some of these problems, is he suggesting that the site that I was asking about might be somewhere close to where the dumping of these effl uents into the Red River after treatment by the City of Winnipeg; and is the Honou rable Min ister su ggesting tha t the environmental control which now has been under the City of Winnipeg, under their control, will be relieved from the City of Winn ipeg and will now come under the environmental control under The Hazardous Waste Management Act?

Will it all now come under the jurisdiction of the Province of Manitoba, and are we relieving the City of Winn ipeg of some of the jurisdiction and control that they've had over some of these materials, and the expense? HON. G. LECUYER: First of all, I'm not implying at all by my response where the hazardous waste system will be located.

All I'm saying is that because there is no such system in place now it means that, alth ough we do have a location in Gimli where we temporarily store hazardou s wastes, it's not sufficient to provide an alternative for many industries or many domestic wastes that now, probably as the easy alternative, is to, in many instances, I suppose, dump down the sew ers. But once we have such a system in place, there will be that alternativ e there and ther efore, hopefully, these problems will not continue to be present to the same degree. I am confident of that.

Having said that, in regard to the City of Winnipeg's exemption, this is not an exemption by legislation. it's an exemption by Order- in-Counci l, which is long­ standing. I belie ve it da tes back to 1970 or 1972. That was one exemption they had before the amalgamation of the various municipalities under Metro. With the River Renewal Program, and with the changes to The Clean Environment Act, it is the intent, eventually, to bring the City of Winn ipeg under the same standards - that's not the word I'm lookin l:l for - under the jurisdiction of the province, as all other municipalities in Manitoba. MR. D.

SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, last year, under some rule changes, one of the rule changes was for us to have committee treated the same way as the House is, in regard to smoking. I find it somewhat ironic that we're dealing with the Department of the Environment and we have a couple of people, who shall remain nameless, who have lit up. I would appreciate it if they would put out their cigarettes. MR. CHAIRMAN: The member is correct. The rules are there is no smoking. People will refrain from smoking. The Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: I don't want to get into any great deba te on smoking or non-smoking.

I'm a non-smoker and actually I appreciate the fact that you don't smoke, but I would hope that it would be your choice, rather than by some regulations that we've put into place. The Honou rable Minister mentioned the storage of hazardou s wastes at Gimli. I know that Gimli did have some storage facilities out there and that we were storing hazardous wastes. I know that the hazardous wastes tha t were stored ou t of Gimli have been removed. Where have they been removed to and was there a cost factor involved? HON. G. LECUYER: These wastes are removed once a year.

They are under contract, through tendering, with a firm in Ontario. This is through an operation that is equipped to dispose of these in a manner that will neutralize these wastes so that they can be disposed in a harmless way, or else to recycle or put them up for sale if there is a market for them. 1925

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 MR. A. KOVNATS: Can I ask the Honourable Minister whether these wastes are the type of wastes that we receive from transformers , with PCB's, or are we just talking about less dangerous hazardous wastes? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes, we are talking about less toxic hazardous wastes. As the member may already be aware, Manitoba Hydro has purchased, over the last year, and I believe the first mobile system in Canada, to treat the low-level PCB's. High-level PCB's, at this point in time, are not being transported . They're being kept in storage at Manitoba Hydro and Winnipeg Hydro. MR. A.

KOVNATS: The PCB's that are being treated are low-level PCB's, I understand, and I guess we had bought the equipment from SunOhio. We were dealing with SunOhio on a contract basis for them to come up and neutralize our PCB-laden transformers, low­ level. What can the Honourable Minister advise us as to the cost factor of purchasing the equipment, as well , in comparison to hiring them on a contract basis? Is it more feasible to purchase it, or is it just more handy, or did we talk Manitoba Hydro into something that was the responsibility of the Manitoba Government? HON. G.

LECUYER: The bulk - I don't know what percentage but, by far, the transformers and capacitators, or other equipment which contains oils with PCB's in them, are the property of Manitoba Hydro. Manitoba Hydro has purchased this equipment of its own, with the hope, I'm sure, that in treating these oils . . . There was a hefty cost in doing this under contract with SunOhio, which led them to, I'm sure, do a cost analysis, on the basis of which they determined it would be cost-effective for them to buy it and, at the same time, because this is costly equipment, that it is not within the affordability of everyone.

First of all, not all provinces have huge amounts of this and Manitoba, by the way, is not the province that has huge quantiities. Still, I'm sure it hopes to be able to treat some of the low-level PCB oils from other jurisdictions, especially the oils coming from Winnipeg Hydro and perhaps, on a contract basis, with oils coming from other provinces . MR. A. KOVNATS: Are there any other sources of PCB's other than Manitoba Hydro and Winnipeg Hydro, or even with Manitoba Hydro or Winnipeg Hydro, that are still in place, transformers that still contain PCB's?

What amounts, and how quickly - are we looking after these transformers first or are we looking after the ones in storage first? How long will it take before we are rid of transformers with low-level PCB's, and high­ level PCB's. HON. G. LECUYER: I can give the member some specifics about that if he gives me a moment to retrace that. I can begin the answer while this is being found. There are indeed PCB transformers in use still by both Hydro facilities. There may be the odd one still in place. Most of the equipment, whether it's capacitators or transformers that are in place , are known.

They have been labelled as such and, generally, it is the belief that it is probably the safest place for them to be until this equipment functions , and functions properly because, as I say, should this be high level PCB's , the only way we can deal with them until we have our hazardous waste management system in place is to keep them in storage which doesn't solve the problem. So there is indeed a certain quantity of this in place and we have very detailed specifics in terms of the quantity - which I thought I had in here but which I'll have to bring to the member. MR. A.

KOVNATS: We have another meeting on Monday and it's just information that I want for the record. You know, I don't want to jump around, but I think that we've got one question here concerning the Clean Environment Commission . It was brought to my attention that there was a service station in Winnipeg that had one of their gas tanks come to the surface and there was a gas spill into the soil, into the sand. Now, I know that this is contrary to the Clean Environment rules, but the sand and the area around where the gas was spilled was cleaned up and had to be removed to the dump .

Somebody had advised them that it had to be under control to be taken to the dump, which doesn't seem reasonable . Who makes these rules that say that sand with gasoline, which doesn 't appear to be that dangerous as far as an environmental hazard, particularly when it's being taken from one place and taken out to the dump? The cost of transporting was somewhere around $5,000, I'm told. Now, who makes these type of rules that we can 't use a little bit of discretion in handling situations like that?

If it's breaking the law , it's breaking the law, but there's got to be some discretion that comes into force here; or is it strictly black and white, and no other consideration? HON. G. LECUYER: I don't know the specifics of the incident the member refers to but I can say that the staff from the Environment Control Branch would probably have given such an order . I can only surmise that that would have been given because of the dangers to public safety in regard to the potential, because of the very highly flammable nature of the substance, that it was felt that that was a necessary precaution.

Those are very frequent incidents , by the way, too frequent , I must say, the incidents of spills of gasoline. That's one of the reasons why, and they're not related very often to the circumstances that the member just describes. I presume he describes a surface spill? MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes, it was. HON. G. LECUYER: Besides those, of course, there are frequent spills which occur underground because of leaky gas tanks. I made reference a while ago, or earlier today, to the fact that we were revising the regulation that applies to that.

If gasoline has been spilled, there is, of course, the potential for explosions as a result of, not negligence, but an unfortunate happening. There's also the potential of ground water contamination if we allow it to stay there and it percolates in the soil. When it gets into the water supply, one of the most difficult things to remove from water is gasoline or other petroleum products that have seeped through the soil, as the people in the area of Bird's Hill will certainly vouch for. 1926

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 lt's been a problem there for some 20 years, in wells which people have paid for, relied upon and built their homes there, hoping to get a reliable water supp ly, an unfortunate spill, which may have occurred years before; suddenly after a long time, having percolated through, finds its way into their water supply and it takes years and years to correct the problem. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'v e learned some thing toda y because I thought that a gasoline spill would evaporate.

I know so little about it but I'm glad I asked the question and it was brought to my attention that the correct action was taken, and that pleases me. The Minister made some remarks earlier about the $100 million Red River and Assiniboine River cleanup proposal made by the First Minister during the last election. I had made some remarks that maybe it was just an election promise, but the Minister has just suggested that it's his department that will be looking after it.

Will it be broken down, as I'm led to believ e, at a $10 million expenditure a year for 10 years, or will we be spending $20,000 or $30,000 for the first two years, and come up with $99 milli on-and-some odd in the last year, just to prove a point, and this would be after the next election. I just wonder whether in fact it was an election promise and it is the intention of the government to fulfil! that promise. HON. G. LECUYER: This is a very real issue. lt's a very real commitment. We have presently, already initiated action in this regard.

When I said earlier this afternoon in my preliminary remarks that there was an interdepartment - and I'm refer ring to the departments of government - committee having been established to look at this issue, because it doesn't relate only to one department. lt doesn't relate only to the Department of Environment; it certainly has implications for Municipal Affairs; it certai nly has implications for Urban Affairs, Natural Resources and, of course, our department. This interdepartmental committee has been mandated to develop a plan which it will present to a stee ring committee.

As I've indicated, before we start spending money on various projects under this label of River Renewal, we want to make sure that we don't just address this on a piecemeal basis or in a haphazard way. lt's got to be very definitely a concrete plan for the long term and, even though we're talking about $100 million for the first 10 years, as a provincial commitment, we are certai nly hoping that the other levels of government wo uld be interested also in cooperating with us on this project because it will cost, over the years, much, much more than that sum of money to correct some of the problems that we were discussing just a moment ago in terms of quality of water.

This sub-committee of interdepartmental technical staff has been given four months to prepare this pr elimin ary report, which will be dis cussed by a committee of senior staff and eventually by Cabinet. I expect that in the initial stages, it will be perhaps a little bit slow to get off the ground. Even though we're talking about a project of 10 years, represe nting a cost of $100 million, I certainly don't expect that there's going to be anywhere near $10 million spent in the first year. When the project really takes off the ground, it will enable us, perhaps, to spend more in some years. MR. A.

KOVNATS: The Honourable Minister had suggested that they were looking for assistance from other sources. I would imagine that's municipal sources and possibly even the Federal Govern ment. I can accept that but are we laying off our bet somewhat and if the assistance isn't forthcoming - because I've listened to, not the Minister, but I've listened to this government that the Minister belongs to, and it's always the resp onsibility of the Federal Government, and if they don't jump in and do their share, then the project is condemned.

I'm not sticking up for the Federal Government, again, I say, they're big boys and they can look after themselves. But we're not using the Federal Government as an excuse that this isn't going to get off the ground. Can the Honourable Minister advise where the $100 million figure came from when we don't seem to have any definite plans as to where we're going. And $100 million doesn't even seem to be the amount that will cover the proposal. Where did the figure come from in the first place? Was it an election promise? HON. G. LECUYER: lt was an election promise; one that we intend to keep.

Proof of that is that we are in the process of initiating action in this regard. Inde ed we have said, as the member may have heard, that we do hope to get the cooperation of the other levels of government because they have an interest in this regard and they stand to benefit as well. Perhaps the member is aware of the Pearse Report which was commissioned by the Federal Government, which was published in 1985, which seeks to establish water quality objectives for drinking water in Canada and we'll certainly col laborate with them in this regard.

One of the ways we can help them achieve their stated goals is for them to cooperate with us. Now, as far as the City of Winn ipeg is concerned, I think that I don't have to make their case. I'm sure the member could readily unde rstand how it can be of benefit and interest to them. Yes indeed, we are proce eding with this particular program. But I repeat, we didn't just make this as an election promise, we are acting on it now; we're not waiting. We said even if they don't cooperate with us, we will still spend our hundred­ millions in there. But we know that it's going to cost a lot more than that.

Even after ten years the problem is not going to be solved, especially if we have to put only provincial dollars on it. So therefore, we do hope to eve ntually make this a people's concern where all levels of government are going to cooperate together. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'll accept what the Minister has suggested because he has never been untruthful to me. Sometimes he's made some statements tha t wer en't quite correct but it wasn't in a malicious manner; it was from lack of a particular knowledge. lt really wasn't that important so I'm not going to condemn the Minister in this regard.

Sewage and Waste Disposal - again, let's get back to that. We have a problem close to the area that I 1927

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 represent. As a matter of fact, one of the Ministers in this room does represent the area, I think, concerning a disposal into the sewer system which is supervised by the City of Winnipeg. it's a rendering plant over in St. Boniface. You have to have a rendering plant that will look after some of these things, otherwise it would be a health hazard and it is a good thing. I don't really care too much for the location, even though it's in the Honourable Minister of Environment's constituency rather than mine. What are we doing to control it?

I know that these people had been encouraged to update some of their equipment, and they did. They spent a few million dollars in updating their equipment, but there still are odors that do come from this plant through the sewer system. I can verify it because I drive by there, as the Honourable Minister on occasion drives by there, and the odour is still there. What control have we brought in? We 've brought this to the Minister's attention in the past. The Minister was aware of it in the past also. Are we doing anything to corr ect the situation?

Are we doing any thing to encourage this particular company to upgrade their equip ment even more so to reduce some of the problems that are incurring now? HON. G. LECUYER: I know the member has reminded me - I'm sure I can remember last year and probably the year before - that this was a problem. Not only was it a problem, but it is one that is present in my own riding. All I can say is that this is an operation under Clean Environment Order .

The member I think is quite right in saying there's a number of complaints arising from that operation and other similar opera tions in the near vicin ity. lt's located there, of course, because it's also the location of other meat-packing industries, etc. They all operate under the Clean Environment Ord er. Generally speaking, the freq uency of problems is way less than in the past. There are, on the other hand, instances where there's a breakdown and there are repair periods. Under those circumstances, of course, the problem is worse than others.

On most days, under normal climatic conditions, there is no problem. There are also certain instances where a combination of both; a breakdown of climatic inversion, for instance, or a cloudy , still evening will cause a more serious problem. Most of the time, even I, who live in the area, am not aware that there is a problem, but I have a confession to make that I don't have as refined a smeller as most people. So the problem can be worse than I imagine it to be. But I am told that the frequency of complaints is very, very low. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Not to make light of what the Minister said about the smeller , but I'd sur e love to have his nose full of dimes. HON. G. LECUYER: I heard diamonds. MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm trying to consider whether or not that's parlia mentary, but we'll let it go for the time being. The Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Ok ay, I've got some questions on pesticides and pesticide permits and I'm going to ask my associate from Portage la Prairie to bring them up­ to-date on that; he's more aware of it.

Also on landfill investigations and hazardous material disposal; landfill investigations - I think he's got some questions around Portage la Prairie and I would like to ask some questions also on the Manitoba Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation. lt's not going to be in great detail, but in the meantime, I would like to turn over the quest ionin g to my associate, the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage. MR. E. CONNERY: Mr. Chairman, the Hazardous Waste Management Program, Phase 1, was initiated in 1983.

According to the 1985 book, the committee said that they were in the final stages or the final chapter. Is it not completed yet? I think that you said it wasn't. HON. G. LECUYER: The Clean Environment Hearings, which are slated for this fall, would be the closing

chapter of that Phase 1. MR. E. CONNER Y: And when would the recommendations then come out, or the conclusions? HON. G. LECUYER: I can only guesstimate on that. I would expect that it would probably take three or four months to have a Clean Environment Commission report. MR. E. CONNERY: The Member for Niakwa discussed the $100 million river, Assiniboine and Red, cleanup. What portion of that is to water cleanup and what portion is to riverbank cleanup, which is the cosmetic sector? HON. G.

LECUYER: As I said, our department is heading this issue at this time which is to also, in the same breath, indicate to the member that we feel that it is important that we first begin by addr essing the quality issue aspect. Certainly there are other parts of that, such as riverbanks, such as maybe tourism associated with that but that's not an integral part of the program itself.

When we talk about water qual ity, of course we are talking about sewage and the problems that exist now, as we know them, in the Assiniboine and the Red River, and in particular in the Winnipeg area. lt's very difficult to give the member a complete and detailed answer until I have that report which I said has been given as a mandate to an interdepartmental committee of techn ical staff to prepare a plan and make recommendations.

But as I say, we would expect to start addressing this from the water quality aspect and not from the riverbank aspect although, as the member knows, erosion on the river bank, erosion is also a problem in many sections of the Red and Assiniboine. MR. E. CONNERY: If you want to see riverbank erosion I can take you to our farm and show you a plastic case which we're very concerned about. But I'm concerned with the allocating of $100 million to water and the cosmetic sector of riverbank cleanup being put into the Budget over the next 10 years without a program, 1928

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 and I guess we have to acknowledge that it was an election promise and it was a somewhat glamourous one. lt looked great to the environmentalists but I feel that the department didn't have any real program in place when they put the $100 million into the plant. I would be very upset if the cosmetic sector of the program went through before a lot of other areas of Manitoba were satisfied in their requirements, such as drainage on farms and highways and a lot of other areas, espec ially in the water drainage where people are having their farms drowned out.

The water quality one I can be more sympathetic to. But is the government going to be doing the clean up of water quality or are they going to be working with industries, towns, cities that are doing the pollution? What is the breakdown there? Who's resp onsibility is it for a lot of the water pol lution? HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think that by the remarks of the member it's clear that this is a very vast problem and, having said that, to add ress all aspects of it is way beyond $100 million on the long term and , as I said before, we do hope to event ually have an involvement of the private sector, of the municipalities, especi ally those that are immediately concerned where these problems occur along stretches of the Assiniboine, along stretches of the Red River.

So it is indeed, as I said before, primarily river quality issue, but it goes beyond that; and eventually we hope that there will be a structure or a mechanism that will addr ess this, which will enable large public input into this issue. We don't pre tend to have all of the answers now and I think if we had awaited the day, we had a complete handle on it and knew exactly what we wanted to do on this, we'd never have proceeded or started to address the problem.

I think the very fact that we made this independently of whether it was an election commitment or not, which it was, compelled us to take action on it and that's what has happened. I expect that it's the proper way to begin it; we have to start by saying, do we want to do this or don't we, and if we are committed to doing this, then we have to put in place the steps necessary to see it happen, and I think that's what's unfolding now.

There won't be any dramatic or earth shattering changes to occur initially in this regard and I expect that it will be a long time before we see these happening but it has started; it's off the ground. The committee that I referred to is due to make its report in September. MR. E. CONNERY: I can discuss the Portage sewage problem with some under standing, in the sense that I'm involved there; we're more up to date.

When they get into sewage problems with small towns and cities and probably with the City of Winnipeg also, there's three departments that get involved, which is Municipal Affairs, Agriculture and the Environmental. I know when they were looking at the Portage problem a few years back, all three departments would have been involved at that point, I assume.

My concern with the Portage situation is that when they did a study of the re quir ements of the City of Portage la Prairie, they came up with a usage of 11 ,400 or 11 ,500 pound loading, so they decided to build a lagoon of the 12,000 pound capacity, which of course left no room for error, no room for expansion and as we know, in the case of Portage la Prairie, they're up to in the area of 25,000 pound loading a day. The deep shaft was totally unable to carry on, keep up with the amount of sewa ge.

Also the type of system that was installed was not totally prototype but surely wasn't proven when it got to industrial waste, had been used, I think - the Town of Virden had a deep shaft, but was basically residental sewage. The two decisions, the decision to go with the deep shaft, which was not proven with industrial waste and second ly, to go with only a 12, 000 pound loading left no room for expansion. Now we have a problem with the City of Portage la Prairie sewage system. What is the Minister's comments on that criteria that was developed? HON. G.

LECUYER: The Member for Portage la Prairie, of course, probably knows the situation and the extent of the problem better than I do in regard to the Portage situation. lt is a serious one, it is one that shows there probably was a lack of planning some years back.

In fact, the member may know that at one point in 1979, I belie ve, the Manitoba Water Services Board had recommended the particular plant for the City of Portage, which was advice given by the Manitoba Water Services Board, which was not accepted at the time and sure is regretted today because, as the member mentions, there's a great deal of potential for food processing in the area and hopefully none of these will be missed in the long term because of this. lt's not only a problem associated with the treatment plant. lt's a problem associated with the lagoon plant; it's a problem associated with the effluence from that; there's a problem related to the landfill in Portage la Prairie; and, besides that, there's uncertainties in regard to the water supply.

Now because the problem is of such magnitude and because of the financial situation of the city of Portage, without going into any details, because I could keep us here the whole evening on that issue alone, suffice to say that there has been an agreement struck between the province and the city of Portage la Prairie which was signed October 17, 1985 and hopefully under that agreement, with assistance from the province, this problem can be resolved gradually in the next five years or so. MR. E. CONNERY: How long can a city go on? Of course, they've had an extension of exemption from the regulations.

How long can this go on? I'm concerned about the quality of water that is in the Assinibo ine River because the thr ee largest vegetable farms are within two or thr ee miles downstream from the outlet of the Portage Lagoon. To me, this is a hazard to food produc tion . We 've seen that there's very little progress or very slow progress going on. The three government departments are very crucial to resolving this nightmare that we have in Portage la Prairie. Is it money that's holding it up, a lack of determination? HON. G. LECU YER: The Clean Environme nt Commission held hearings in April '86. We're still 1929

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 awaiting that report. In fact, I cannot project when or how long this will be exte nded, but yes to the question of is this a financial question; very much so as far as the city of Portage la Prairie is concerned. MR. E. CONNERY: There would be provincial participation in the Town of Russell where CSP Foods went into. There was something like over $3.5 million was put into the infrastructure, which I think was basically water and sewage with some other infrastructure, but those were the two main ones.

I'm sure there would be some provincial input into the city of Portage; in fact, I know there will be some provincial input. Who makes the decisions when the regulations are going to be exceed ed? Who makes that final decision to allow the city to dump effluent into the Assiniboine River that is over the allowable limit? · HON. G. LECUYER: There was, of course, the plant that was put in place. lt was a plant that was supposed to be specifications to deal with the sewage load which had been estimated at the time.

A number of industries were added to the community or the city, others expanded, and the resulting problem is the one that the member has alluded to, that as a result the sewage load is way above the capacity of the plant al ready. Now, as I said, there have been hearings.

The Clean Environment Commission may author ize or may come down with an order which would allow limits to be varied for a certain period of time, to be reviewed after that, but as part of that agreement that was achieved with the city, the clean out of the lagoon, which is itself a problem, it is deeply silted, is supposed to be completed by this fall. There's to be installa tion of better valve controls at the lagoon. The feasibility study of the system which has been required under that agreement is now under way and options as far as the industrial waste load are also currently being studied. MR. E.

CONNERY: When it comes to water testing to get the amount of BOO and so forth that's in the sewage, does the department recommend certain types of systems for sampling? HON. G. LECUYER: I'm told, Mr . Chairman, that there are standards and the recommendations would be in regard to those standards. MR. E. CONNERY: The duck-bill type, which is one that goes on a basis of a time frame, really is not a very satisfactory one when analyzing sewage because the amount of sewage varies through the course of a day, and a plant operating on an 18 or 16 hour

schedule will then have the same duck-bill sampling the other 8 or 16 hours when there's very little, where the other system is on a meter post with only samples according to the volume of sewage going down the system. Does the department get involv ed to recommend which is the appropriate system for testing? HON. G. LECUYER: I am told that it's a 24-hour composite monitoring system. MR. E.

CONNERY: When it comes to landfill, the dump sites, and I'm using Portage, and I am assuming that a lot of the regulations and information pertain to the other towns and cities in the Province of Manitoba, there's a real problem with the dump at Portage in the sense that the dump itself is away beyond the lic ence that was issued to the city of Portage la Prairie, and yet no alternative site has been able to be lic ensed to accept the landfill of ground sewage or garbage pickup. HON. G. LECUYER: There are indeed problems with the landfill and the capacity.

I believe that we have advised the city of Portage that landfill is now close to its capacity. We have advised the city a number of years ago to seek an alternative landfill site. The agreement that I referred to awhile ago also has provisions or requirements that app ly for the city in terms of either purchasing land or obtaining rights to the use of land for the purpose of a new landfill, because indeed as the member mentions to our problems. These problems can only get worse if it's not resolved. MR. E. CONNERY: Is part of the problem of getting an altern ate site part of the licensing of that site? HON. G.

LECUYER: The City of Portage has not sought registration or licensing of a new site at this point in time, yes. MR. E. CONNER Y: As the Minis ter kn ows, Mr . Chairman, the site at Portage is very close to the town and very close to populated area; in fact, there's people within a very close proxmity to the dump and there's been a problem with arsenic in the water. The people close to the dump are, I believe, being forced to sue to have some alternate water source.

Does the Clean Envir onment get involv ed to dete rmin e who is responsible and to say yes this dump is contributing to the arsenic levels in the water? HON. G. LECUYER: There have been meetings with the parties concerned. The Clean Envir onment Commission itself does nt have the research staff or scientific or the technical staff to do this. This would be the department with a set monitor the situation in this regard.

There is, as the member has indicated, currently there is a lawsuit involv ed in here and I'm not too sure; I have to tread carefu lly because of the fact that there is a lawsuit on this and there's a limited amount I can say in that regard. MR. E. CONNERY: What is the allowable level of arsenic in the water when it's not safe to drink? HON. G. LECUYER: I can get that information if the member is patient for a few seconds here. We 'll find that for the member in a few minutes. If the member has other questions, I'll have information in a moment. MR. E.

CONNERY: How many different towns, cities, individuals, businesses are being allowed to di sperse effl uent into river streams or lakes above the BOO lev el? HON. G. LECUYER: At the present time, I'm told there's only one we suspect that may be above the limits under which it is supp osed to operate, so that puts Portage in a particular category in that re gard. 1930

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 While I still have the mike here. The information the member was se eking in terms of the maximum acceptable level of arsenic in drinking water according to the Canadian guidelines is .05 mg./litre. MR. E. CONNERY: Was the level at Notre Dame ever above that level? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes, I believe so. MR. E. CONNERY: What was it at? HON. G. LECUYER: The deeper aqu ifer or wells that are at the aquifer, I can give you specifics of that in one second. I'll provide that information as far as Notre Dame is concerned as well. MR. E. CONNERY: When it gets to the dumping . . . HON. G.

LECUYER: The shallo wer aquifer was found to be producing at times levels of .016 mg./litre, but the deeper aquifer were higher than that and that is the point that I don't have and hope to have in a moment. MR. E. CONNERY: Is the Minister not concerned, and I know environmentalists and I know of one particular environmentalist that get overzealous and sometimes common sense gets lost in the mill, is this maybe part of the reason that illegal dumps like the one upstream from Portage does come into play?

I don't agree with it, but sometimes when we try to be extremely restrictive we put pressure on people and they go to the altern ate source which is illegal dumps. I've seen this with the Portage dump on more than one occasion where really basically there is only one major dump in the Portage municipality which is north of High Bluff at the northern extreme of the municipalit y, extremely far for people to go, and a lot of people don't have the adequate vehicles. The highway that goes to it, Highway 227, is an atrocious highway that in bad weather you can hardly get down the road.

Does this not lead to some of these illegal dumps or people dumping animals into the river because they have a lot of rest rictions on animal disposal? So the alternate easy route is to dump them into the river; where some more communications is part of it and I think a little more common sense. HON. G. LECUYER: We ll, I don't think, Mr. Chairman, it has to do with the rest rictions in terms of where they can dispose or what they can dispose.

In this particular instance we are talking about basically domestic wastes of all types, the same type that you would find in the regular dump site, basical ly, including vehicles and household applia nces and containers of all sorts, detergents and pesticide containers, whether small cans or repellents or what not used in the household. I believe it's a practice unfortunately that in this particular instance had started many, many years ago, I am told as far back as 25 or more years ago, and we know that it was cleaned up four years ago, but it's hard to get the people out of their usual habits.

If this is established as the place where they usually dump, that's the place they will continue to go unfortun ately. 1931 As I already have said to the member privately in the House the other day, and he was I suppose correct in asking the question of the Minister of Natural Resources when I got up to answer, because it's on Crown land, Natural Resources will clean this particular dump site, will put in place a barrier or a barricade of some kind to break that habit of disposing garbage at that particular location. lt's certainly not a proper place. lt's so very close to the river that one never knows what one individual will go and dump in a particular location like that.

Being so close to the river, there's always the potential danger that is going to leach into the river system or percolate into the river and affect the water supply on which the city depends on, and that is a problem. Also, when the member asked me whether this was on the south side or the north side, I wasn't able to tell him at the time. I'll see if I can get that answer. lt is on the south side of the river, that particular dump. MR. E. CONNERY: I think I know where that is. My final question, Mr. Chairman.

The number of small dumps that have been closed throughout the R.M. of Portage, and I'm sure this is the same for all municipalities in the province, that you get one major dump and all the small ones have been closed and it becomes more or less domestic garbage that we have to dispose of. Then you see people taking the lazy route. I don't condone it, but when the dump site is so far away, and people in the City of Winnipeg won't realize what a nuisance it is getting rid of your domestic garbage.

When you've got to drive 10, 15, 20 miles over bad highways - and I reaf firm that Highway 227 is an atrocious one and nobody likes to take their vehicles down there when the weather's bad, so they kick it out their car on the road allowances or they create other dumps. I think the Minister wants to take a little examination of some of the criteria and sometimes, to establish something that is perfect , we do more damage than we have done good; so it's just a suggestion, as I perceive it, in the city or the rural Municipality of Portage and I would think it's very similar in other municipalities. HON. G.

LECUYER: Wel l, I agree with the member that one always has to make that effort and it means you may have to travel a certain distance, you have to package or bag this garbage to take it to a dump, but there is certain ly, especially on farm opera tions, a way that they can temporarily store these on the farm especially and then when they have a sufficient amount to carry it to the regulated, designated dump.

I agree with the member that perhaps it is leftovers of old practices which have to be broken, and I think that instances such as arsenic in the water supplies, whether in some cases this is as a result of improper operation of landfill or whether it is naturally occurring into the water supply or on the ground - in some cases, that is unknown - but with the use of pesticides that we have today, and most of these, if properly used, present no problem, but if improperly disposed could, down the road, present problems.

Certain ly, as some of these problems that do exist come to the awareness of people, I am sur e that in itself will be a factor that will educate them.

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 We, as a department, also have a role to play in that regard and that is why we have instituted, for instance, the Pesticide Residue Recovery Program. We 'r e quite ple ased with the results and I think it has gone a long way in terms of providing education in one specific area. Hopeful ly, people will discontinue such practices because, on a daily basis in various parts of Canada, they are made aware of problems which result from the fact that there was improper treatment or improper landfilling or improper sewage treatment.

I think that will, in itself, contribute significantly to raise the level of awareness and understanding that we just cannot, in the future, continue to dispose of our wastes as we have in the past. MR. E. CONNERY: I have one further question. lt just came to me when you were talking about it.

Would the Minister then advise the RCMP, when they do catch people who are throwing garbage on to municipal and provincial road allo wances, not let them off with a warning but, in fact, fine them, because this has happened on more than one occasion where they have identified the guilty person and then just gave them a warning, rather than fining them and making them clean it up. I think we've got to start with our law enforcement people to make sure that they know what the rules are and the intentions of the Environment Department. HON. G.

LECUYER: The Public Health Inspectors, the Environmental Officers have the power to ticket people as well as the RCMP for these offences. I mentioned in my opening remarks that we're also revising the litter regulation and hopefully will improve it and make it more rest rictive in that regard. Maybe improving the regulation itself will act as an incentive to cut down these improper practices. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for ln kster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd just like to make a couple of comments and maybe have a question or two in my comments as well.

I think the discussion we just had with the Member for Portage la Prairie shows the need for us to proceed with some haste with the departmental initiative that you outlined earlier in your presentati on, the need for better standards set across the province, the need for the province to take a greater responsibility in the establishment of those standards and the enforcement of those standards as well.

The Portage situation really came about by a municipality not willing to listen to the advice that was given to it by people with a fair degree of expertise and going towards the deep shaft method as a way that they thought they'd be able to cut costs. lt's shown that it was a big mistake and they recognize that now. I've had several discussions on other water issues as well with the present mayor. I'm quite disappointed to see tha t he's not planning to run aga in, Mayor Gr eenslade of Portage la Prairie.

He's a person that, partially because of the involvement he's had within Portage la Prairie, and certainly the role that he's played with the Action Committee on Garrison, as a chair of that committee 1932 for a few years and as a lobbyist both within the province, and educator in the province, plus a lob byist in Was hington, has shown him the value that water is to our society.

I just heard on the news, I think it was this morning, tha t he's not intending to run aga in, and I'm disappointed to hear that because I think we need more municipal leaders like Mayor Greenslade who now recognize the value of treating water properly and the importance that it is for the river systems adjacent to us as well as the ground waters.

I think another trap that we fall into so frequent ly, and I can go back to experiences 25 years ago in my home province of Nova Scotia where there was such an eagerness to bring industry in, and I think this situation follo wed true in the Portage la Prairie area as well where they saw a potential, and a proven pot ential now, to develop a broader-based food processing industry in that town, and one of the least considerations in the development of that was the containment and the treatment of the effluent from those plants.

We tend too often to tell industries that come in, because we'r e so anxious to see investment and to see jobs created in a particular community or in the overall economy, that the environment in the past has been our lower priori ty. I can remember, as I referred earlier to the Scott Paper Co. Ltd. when it set it up in Abercrombie in Nova Scotia, the Minister of Economic Deve lopment at the time was also the Minister responsible for water, and they were told at the time don't worry about pollution, we'll take care of that.

They spent millions and millions of public dollars for years after that trying to clean up the pollution problems that plant created. That was possibly the worst example that I've seen of it, but it's an example that is not infrequent in lesser as well as possibly greater magnitudes across the countr y.

The cost with the contamination in the province that it puts on is not absorbed generally by the industry but by the public, and we in the public sector I think have a respon sibility to protect the general public from facing those feature costs in negotiations with various industries to set up in certain areas the need for province-wide, and maybe water basin and areas, specific regulations established by the department with some responsibil ity, I think, by the senior level of government, in this case the Provincial Government, to assist the municipalities in building a superstructur e to be able to match those standards is desperately needed throughout the province.

I am working with the Minister current ly, and I hope that before too long we will be able to bring in a new process, if you wish, for the Member for Niakwa - and hope that we have his and other members of the Opposition's support - in bringing forward much more adequa te legislation towards protect ing the environment and arresting the problems that we get into by not bringing these standards forward. Higher standards I don't believe contribute to a greater degr ee of law breaking as far as disposal of waste is concerned.

What brings that about is a lack of facilities, a lack of education, in particul ar, of the people to learn of the impacts of it. I think the Member for Portage la Prairie is absolutely correct when he says that instead of slapping people

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 on the wrist and telling them not to do it again, we maybe have to go back to - I forget the officer's name on Alice's Restaurant - but to find the culprits, to make them as well participate in the cleanup. Let them clean their own garbage up. Another aspect of that whole process, and I'll ask the Minister if he's had any success in this area so far - the other day I came upon an article, which he had come upon before me, on recy cling solid wastes. The city of Hamilton, Ontario now pays at least one recy cling firm $11 per tonne of solid waste that they take for recycling purposes.

This, in turn, and the reason the city of Hamilton does that is because their cost for solid waste disposal is presently running at I believe it's in the vicinity of $25 per tonne to dispose of that. So by paying an industry, to assist a fledging rec ycling industry to get going by paying it to relieve the city of some of the burden of the solid waste accumula ted in that city is accomplishing several goals and a major benefit to society.

One is reducing of level of cost of municipal waste disposal, so that's a saving on the taxpayer there; plus it's creating a substantial number of jobs and creating new industries in the recyc ling area and certainly it's of benefit. The

article came out of the Stelco magazine. So they are certainly very much in favour of the project, and when you get that kind of industrial support from the steel industry, I think it bodes well for other industries to start follo wing suit. I am wondering if the Minister has been able to so far ascertain to the recycling office that he has wisely established in the department what kind of feasibility there would be for us to work with municipalit ies for the establishment of such a contributory payment system to recy cling firms. HON. G. LECUYER: That was a long speech to get to that

preamble to get to that question. The question of recy cling is one in which we are basicall y very much at an infancy stage, but we have, as the member has indicated, recently hired a recyl cing coordina tor. Hopefully we will, as a result of that, someone devoting full time, liaising, coordinating in that regard, come up with some proposals which will enable us to put some programs in place down the road.

There is, on the other hand, as the member will appreciate, and all members I'm sure can appreciate, the difference between a recycling program put in place in the industrial triangle of Ontario versus one that we can put in place in Manitoba where of course the costs associated are very much dependent on the volumes and the varieties of waste substances that are produced and the industries that are located nearby who can reuse, recycle the substances. In that respect, I am sure we will learn.

I expect we will find some solutions because of the experimentation that is carried about in other jurisdictions where it is more feasible for them to initiate such projects.

That having been said, there are a few ini tiatives that 1 mentioned this afternoon; one in particular with regard to Churchill, one that has to do with a litter study that is being carried out in the North as well where it is a major problem, at least in the south, because of the nearness to disposal grounds, the acce ssibility to the waste exchange, the fact that there are reusable beverage containers being more prevalent than they have been in the North.

The problem is not as acute although it is one that certainly we have to address now because it will get worse, and once we are faced with the magnitude of the problem that we have, we don't want to find ourselv es having to wake up with the major problems on our hands, and that's why we are devoting some resources to try and get a handle on it now. But I have to say to the member that it's not going to be an easy problem to resolve. MR. D. SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, I know the person who has been hired as a recy cling officer.

I have a great deal of faith in his ability and also the far-re aching of his knowledge in this area and also the energy which he is willing to devote to it. So in knowing the activities in the past couple of years of the Recycling Council of Manitoba, and it's again in its very early stages as well, but once again a very keen and committed group of people in tying in with industry, both on the potential exchange side of the people who are consumers as well as producers of the waste.

I would suggest that one thing that we have to consider in considering the size of our market and the so-called visible economics, or the evident visible economics in the first rush of recy cling, is that one thing that we do not generally take into consideration is the future costs.

Now we're at the stage where we are having to go into some dump sites and dig back up what was dumped 40, 50, 10, or 20 years ago, and that was through very high cost initiatives and projects that, if more emphasis would have been brought to that in the past toward recycl ing, there'd be much less to dig up in the first instance now, plus one would have less need for new resource exploitation. You mentioned the North. lt's several years now, it's 1980 since I was working in the North, and working in particular in reserve communities for the Government of Canada.

The situation there as to environmental standards, I can recall a virtual sea of oil drums. I'm wondering if there has been any change in the quantitiies of oil drums in our Northern communities, both reserve and non-reserve communities, as far as empty oil drums that have not been taken out by the contractors. If they can bring in full ones, they can certainly take out the empty ones on the flights back. I wonder if there's been any moves in that area. HON. G. LECUYER: I cert ainly am not very kno wledgeable of the North, having not had the opportun ity to tr avel extensively into Northern Manitoba.

I certainly cannot appreciate the order of the problem. lt gives me an opportunit y also to bring an additional component of an answer for the Member for Niakwa, when he was read ing from the Order-in-Council in regard to that Churchill study. I wanted to bring that answer to him earlier , but simply forgot. When he mentioned that the word "hazardous" was used in there, I remember having told him earlier that we were talking primarily about scrap metal, but there is indeed also some hazardous substances because there are, as the 1933

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 Member for lnks ter just mentioned, quite a number of drums of various substances, which will proably require some testing to determine what's in some of these. So, in that respect, the word "hazardous" can also be applied to some of these wastes that are in the North. The study that I referred to a moment before will give us, hopeful ly, some idea of quantities and actually a better understanding of what it is that we will have to deal with in terms of the wastes that have been accumulated in the North. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister answered a question during question period from my colleague to the right of me with respect to refunds, mandatory deposits on aluminum soft drink cans in particular . Could the Minister justify to the committee why Manitoba does not have a mandatory deposit on aluminum soft drink cans? We set that example for the HON. G.

LECUYER: We have, and I don't know when this was put in place - I know it was already in place when I came to this department - an agreement with the various bottling or soft drink industries in Manitoba, whereby they would sort of self-police themselves, and had agreed to keep the level of containers in Manitoba primari ly, I believe it was 80 percent in terms of reusable, refundable bottles. lt is only in recent times, with the advent of the aluminum can, that the problem has gotten out of hand.

That is why we've recently had the staff go and look at the program that's in place in Minneapolis and have had discussions with the beverage industry. They propose to put in place a similar program in Manitoba, starting next month. Hopefully that will deal with the problem that has been growing in the last two years, which wasn't so much of a problem in Manitoba before that, because of that agreement that was in place.

If we were to find that does not resolve the problem, certainly we'll have to look at implementing some other measures, whether it's putting in a regulation whereby they'd have to refund or incr ease the refu nds. I have to explain that this system that is being looked at to put in place here in Manitoba by the beverage industry will consist of refu nds on these aluminum containers. MR. G. MERCIER: Could the Minister perhaps more fully describe the system that is to go into effect in a month? I wasn't very clear on that. HON. G.

LECUYER: This will consist of establishing col lection centres in Winnipeg, Thompson, and Brandon, where these containers will be taken by the purchasing public and where they will be refunded for these containers that they bring back. MR. G. MERCIER: What will the amount of the refund be? HON. G. LECUYEA: I don't have the specifics on that. I belie ve it's by the pound, but that remains to be confirmed. I am told that it will vary according to the market value of the aluminum. MA. G. MERCIER: Has the Minister examined the program initiated by the Liquor Control Commission?

I believe when I was Attorney -General, but if it was under Mr. Penner , I'll be glad to give him the credit. They instituted a refund for beer cans. Has the Minister's department examined the success of that program, which I believe has been fairly successful? HON. G. LECUYER: We have detailed statistics in terms of the percentage return, which is fairly high. it's not indeed as high as the bottle returns, for instance, or beer, which is about 80 percent. I believe in terms of beer cans, it's approximately 56 percent. I stand to be corrected on that, but I believe that's pretty close.

I'm told it's between 55 percent and 60 percent, and I said 56 percent, so that's pretty close. I'm not satisfied that this is sufficiently high a retu rn. I think that we have to look at other containers, as well, other bottle containers, and I would think that we also have to start looking in terms of what we do with the other contain ers that come from the Liquor Commission and from a variety of other sour ces. MA. G. MEACIEA: Mr.

Chairman, I have no problem with that, but in the meantime we have a much greater problem for the environment in terms of the aluminum soft drink cans, which surpass in far greater numbers the liquor bottles. Could I ask the Minister this: I believe the · refu nd by the Liquor Commission for a beer can is five cents, how would that compare to this amount per pound that the industry is prepared to compensate a consumer when he brings back a soft drink can? Is it greater or lesser than five cents per can? HON. G.

LECUYEA: To give very accurate answers to that, we'll have to see when that starts in operation next month. I guess it's safe to say that it will be a lower return than it is on the beer cans. The member should also know that when you'r e buying the beer cans, you're also paying an additional amount for the beer in cans and therefore you're getting back some of what you paid for, which is not the case in terms of the beverage containers.

We 'll have to watch care fully because indeed the amount of return, I suspect very strongly , is one of the factors that will determine the degree of efficiency and the percentage of the return. I'm not convinced, before that is in operation, that it will be effect ive. I will not make that kind of a judgment; we'll wait. But I certainly suspect that it will be less than what is provided for beer cans. MA. G. MEACIEA: Mr. Chairman, Jet me assure the Minister and the bottling industry that I'm not critical of them.

I don't think they can be criticized for the fact that consumers litter the environment with the aluminum soft drink cans. They are not the culprit. They're selling a product that the public wants, in a form that they want it. The Manitoba Environmental Council pointed out in their 1984 report that they expected that some - does 1934

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 the Minister have any information on how many soft drink aluminum cans are sold in one year in Manitoa? HON. G. LECUVER: I saw these figures not more than two days ago and I have misplaced them - because I thought I had it here. The best that I can give you is the figure I have here, and I don't know if that represents only soft drinks - I'm told it is - about 80 million a year. MR. G. MERCIER: What percentage are being recycled now? HON. G. LECUVER: Virtually none. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, it's difficult to belie ve that we wouldn't be taking some action.

We 'r e not blaming the bottling industry. A program that gives less than five cents per can to the consumer to return the can for rec ycling is not going to be effe ctive. When you have in the beer industry only 56 percent of the cans being returned for a nickel a can, the return is going to be much much less, particularly if you have to take them, I think, as the Minister indicated, to only three collection centres in Winnipeg, or Manitoba. I'm not sure which he was ref erring to. You're going to have a very low percentage, or low number of those 80 million cans being returned.

I ask the Minister of the Environment, how long can the enviro nment accept some 80 million aluminum cans every year? lt's mind-boggling. What is the problem, when eight other provinces have the legislation? We 're doing it with beer cans. I don't know what the real concern is by the Minister in not proceed ing with a mandatory deposit in a sufficient amount to encourage a very high percentage of those cans to be returned for rec ycling. HON. G. LECUVER: I have to agree to a certain extent with the Member for St. Norbert. I'm talking about - these are projections in terms of a problem that is upon us now.

As I said, the problem wasn't there until very recently because I don't belie ve it's two years yet, cer tainly not two years, that the soft drink in aluminum cans has picked up. lt's only in very recent times. That is why we indeed feel very strongly that that problem has to be resolved. I haven't got all of the details in regard to the plan being put in place. When I said thr ee collection centres, I don't necessarily mean there's only going to be one in Winnipeg. Hopefully that's not what is being planned here.

I'll endeavour to get some more information or details in terms of what it is that the beverage industry is propo sing, so th at I can provide additional information. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, one more question. I think there may be other questions from members of the committee, but would the Minister give us an assurance that - I take it he's made a commitment to proceed with this voluntary program by the ind ustry - hopefully the Legislature will, after this Session, resume sometime in mid-Febr uary.

If this program, and he'll have the results of this program during the fall months, if it's to begin in August, he'll have five or six months' results from that program.

If it's not being successful in collecting a significant - at least equivalent to what the Liquor Commission is doing, 56 percent, that he will take some further action in this reg ard and consider bringin g in legislation at the next Session, if it's necessar y, to impose the mandatory deposit in order to stop this littering of 80 million aluminum - I take it then it's not all littering, I appreciate that, but 80 million aluminum soft drink cans going into the environment every year is phenomenal. HON. G. LECUVER: I agree. I agree with the Member for St.

Norbert. lt is a problem that I can recall, going back some two years ago, was one of those that - at the time it wasn't the aluminum can but it was the bottles, the non-refundable bottles, because in the south, yes, we have a high refund level on the refu ndable beverage bottles. The percentage sold in plastic containers is around 23 percent, I believe, so the big problem is not situated there. The growing problem, and the one that's upon us now, is indeed aluminum cans. I'll certainly want to follow very closely the program being put in place by the industry and monitor it very closely .

Indeed, if we find that it is not being successful, I can assure the member that we'll certainly look at discussing with the industry and look at putting in place tighter res trictions, legislation, if necessary, or regulation. MR. CHAIRMAN: The time being 10:00 p.m., what is your wish? Do you wish to continue? MR. A. KOVNATS: lt's our intention to continue at least to the end of Resolution 63. I had given assurance to the Minister that we would proceed as long as possible, until we can't keep our eyes open any long er. In the form of cooperat ion, we would like to continue. MR.

CHAIRMAN: If that's your will, the Member for Ell ice. MR. H. SMITH: Mr . Min ister , you talk about the Minneapolis plan, a volunt ary plan, how successful is that plan? If you're adopting a voluntary dir ection and it's a direct copy of the Minneapolis plan, I would think that you'd be copying something that's fairly successful, or else why are we botheri ng? How successful is it in Minneapolis? HON. G. LECUVER: Mr. Chairman, staff from my department, as well as representatives of the beverage industry, went down to look at their operation and evaluate it.

I don't have specific figures but we can endeavour to get some of those. In the meantime, all I can say is they were satisfied that this was a program that was quite successful and that's why we looked at implementing at least that as a first step. If it's not successfu l, we'll have to resort to other measures. MR. H. SMITH: lt's obvious that if the plan is successful, it's better to have a volunta ry plan than a compuls ory one, as long as it meets with some success. Can you get for me the figures on, No. 1, how successful it is in relationship to the number of cans sold in that state?

Second ly, the amount that they pay for deposit. HON. G. LECUVER: I understand that is information that we can get and I will endeavour to get that information. 1935

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 MR. A. KOVNATS: Ju st a couple of other small qu estions on this environmental management, Environmental Control Services, and then we'll pass this item and move onto the next. I would like to bring up the su bject of pesticides. In the book it's provides pesticide-related services with respect to recei ving, revie wing, and issuing pesticide permits. Can the Honourable Minister bring us up to date as to the problems that havE 07E place over the last year with the permits?

Have we run into any problems with any of the municipalities, particu larly, with obtaining of these permits in advance to spraying with pesticides? HON. G. LECUYER: No major problems that I'm aware of. MR. A. KOVNATS: Does the Honouable Minister have any intention of changing the policy? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, the full program hasn't been in operation for a full year. One of the requirements under the program is that at the end of the season of operation under the permit, each permittee is to make a report to the department.

I imagine we'll get some feedack and we'll be better able to evaluate the success of the operation under the permit, the problems associated with that, and we'll certainly look at those comments and those reports to see if changes are necessary to the permit system as it exists, or improvements are necessar y. MR. A. KOVNATS: One last part on this one. In the Supple mentary Information for Legislative Review, the Mani toba Environment and Workplace Safety and Health, it reads: Technical Support: This department gives techn ical suppor t to the monitoring of the un derground research lab site.

Where is this underground research Jab site? Is that the one at Pinawa. HON. G. LECUYER: The one at Lac du Bonnet. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(a)(1)-pass; 2.(a)(2)-pass. 2.(

b) Environmental Management Services - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: This is the

section which monitors provincial air quality through the National Air Pollution Surveillance. I would think this is the same department that should be monitoring the types of mosquitoes and be under mosquito control. I kn ow th at we get somewhat the resp onsibility - you're not going to get away easily on your rejection of the spraying in your area. What I would suggest is that this also should be the department that does the monitoring of mosquitoes, to help make decisions as to whether spraying will take place or not take place. Am I correct in so assuming? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr .

Chairman, the mosquitoes, all of a sudden, have sprung up under air pollution and I don't quite . . . MR. A. KOVNATS: We ll, it's the monitoring of air pollution. HON. G. LECUYER: I've lost sight, by the way of the question which was asked. MR. CHAIRMAN: Should they monitor mosquitoes? Is that the question? MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: Should this department monitor mosquitoes? HON. G. LECUYER: We do, indeed, in the department. I don't believe it's under this particular

section but the one that we've just passed , where mosquitoes are being monitored. We do monitor at 10 different locations in the city. The city does similar monitoring. We have traps and we not only count them but we also establish what type we have in those traps. I gave some of the specifics in regard to this type of information to the member and other members in the House during the Session so far, until the point where the mosquitoes practically disappeared. lt only needed that we stopped spraying them and the other insects and the birds started eating them.

The member knows my views on this question of mosquitoes. He can label me whatever way he wants. Some have said good things to me in this regard. Some have said bad th ings. I think, as Min ister of the Environment - I know the member who made the remarks which followed my opening remarks somehow doesn't feel that perhaps I should have indicated where I stood on this issue. I know darn well that if I hadn't, at one point in the House he would have labelled me probably as not standing up to the re sponsibilities as I should, as Minister of the Environment, if I myself did not indicate my position in this regard.

I think we have a res ponsibility to ask not only what is the immediate impact of what we do in questions on the environment, but what is the long-term impact. I think, in this regard, we know today much more than we did in the past. When substances such as 2,4,5- T, DDT, etc .• PCB's came on the market, they were not considered as potentially dangerous. Fortunately we did come to understand afterwards that they were a problem, not only to the environment but to the health of human beings in the environment, and all other types of living organisms, and these substances have been banned.

In spite of the fact that we know a great deal more about many of those substances, there's a great deal that we still don't know.

The fact is that there's a great many new substances that come on the market every year and maybe they don't cause us to develop cancer immediately, maybe they don't cause us to develop a variety of other lung diseases and, who knows, maybe other diseases for which we know not the the cause at the present time, various syndromes, etc., maybe we'll find out that it's better to be a little bit cautious in this regard rather than to jump both feet ahead here and use them in a rather haphazard way.

Beyond that, I question, and even the City of Winnip eg will admit that the degree of effectiveness of the spray program, or fogging, is questionable. Lar viciding, on the other hand, is a different issue and the city is doing more in that regard and I hope 1936

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 will improve their program in this particular area. Maybe that, in itself, will go a long way to controlling the problem. Most other cities in North America do not fog and have no worse a problem than we have. We have to accept that mosquitoes have been with us probably for a centu ry, millenniums, and there's no quick-fix answer. They will probably be with us centuries down the road unless we find a way of coping with that in a way that is not detrimental to health and to the enviroment.

I believe that most of these chemicals, if used properly, are probably not damaging but I don't think that we can just agree or give our blessing for their indiscriminant use. it's cheaper and easier to use the preventative approach, as I said in regard to The New Environment Act we propose to adopt, rather than to have to spend hundr eds of millions of dollars to repair the damage after the fact, or to have to suffer the ill effects of this damage.

In ending what I feel are much too short remarks in this particular regard, because I looked into this at a fair bit of length and I assure the member that I could entertain him for a long time on this particular issue; but I think I will end at this point and simply say very much in line with the theme of the Environment Week this year, that it is what we do today that will determine the quality of the environment that we have tomorrow, and it's up to all of us to act in this regard. MR. A. KOVNATS: I respect the Minister's decision. I always have.

The only thing that I condemn the Minister is that if he feels that strongly about it, he should have discontinued spraying comple tely , not just to the choice of whether you wanted to spray your own property, or within so much of an area of your own property. I think if the Minister does feel that strongly about it, the spraying program should have been dis continued completely, although I would n't have appreciated it. I think that would have been the Minister's choice if he's right in his de cision.

If he wants to protect the environment and he feels that strongly about it, why didn't he discontinue the complete spraying program? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, the Environment Department has never sprayed or fogged to control nuisance mosquitoes. The department has undertaken a step that it did not before, and that is through the permit system, because we want, through the system, to have better knowledge of what is used, how it's used, the quantities that are used, in order to determine down the road if perhaps that is not one of the things that we should be doing.

Initially we said we are implementing that permit system not to stop the spraying by government, or government agencies, or municipalities over public properties, but to have a better control, a better understanding of what is being done in that regard. In imposing certain restrictions and, in particul ar, some of these, I think the member will agree, are eminently sensible. I have referred to no spraying, or indiscriminant aerial spraying, or spraying in school yards, or parks where activities are taking place.

The add itiona l control was, of course, so we could dete rmin e, for instance, if a mun icipality or a government agency was requesting to use a particular chemical and we knew of something that would be as effect ive and less potent ially harmful to the environment, we could propose that kind of change. We also implemented the other restriction which was the 100 metre buffer zone.

My remarks previously were basically add dressed in that particular regard because, based on the city's report of last year, although all those who apply for a permit this year will have to submit a report at the end of the operation of the summer season, the City of Winnipeg has already in the past complied with a requirement that wasn't there. I don't know that it was a requirement, but the city was reporting to us at the end of the season.

Last year's report - I remember which page - third paragraph, Page 14, stated that under normal wind conditions and normal climatic conditions the spray would spread some 90 metres. Therefore, in imposing that restriction of 100 metres, we were, in essence, very much in tune with their own findings. The only thing that we were saying if someone, whom I believe has a right if he doesn't want to be exposed, or expose members of his household to the pesticide, could at least get some measure of relief if we imposed a 100 metre buffer, you know, if it spreads over 90 metres, 10 metres above the width of a property.

So I could not guarant ee that even under these kind of restrictions they would not get any spray at all because, for one thing, it only applies on the street that he lives, and the streets on either side will be less than 100 metres, so he will get some from that. At least, what we're saying is to guarantee some measure of their right in that they will get at least less of the spray than they would otherwise if they had not written themselves out. I want to correct one thing I said. I said that the city voluntarily submitted their report. I am told that it was a requirement and they were complying with that.

Basically what we said is you say yourselves that under normal spray conditions it will spread 90 metres, so our restriction, therefore, makes use of your findings and implements it, guaranteeing a little bit of that freedom, right, that people have to exercise. MR. A. KOVNATS: There are five sites in Northern and Eastern Manitoba for air polution check ing. What are we checking for, how often do we check and what are the results of our checking? I would think it's acid rain but I want to have it confirmed. HON. G.

LECUYER: We do some continuous monitoring for the sulphur deposition, their effect on wild life, their effect on vegeta tion, and we check for the acidity of the rain and snow. MR. A. KOVNATS: Ok ay, the bacteriological monitoring of 20 recreat ional beaches during the summer months, checking for radiation groun dwater and pesticides in the water and things of that nature, have we ever found anything of any danger in any of these 20 beaches that have been checked, and has it been corrected if there has been problems?

I wouldn't think that there's any problems, but I'd just like to know if there's been any results of the monitoring of these 20 beaches. HON. G. LECUYER: The testing is done mainly to determine the bacterial loading, the coliforms in the 1937

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 water, to be able to provide information for people who use these beaches as resort areas. As far as the last part of the question where the problems have been discovered in the past, I can only say yes to that. I stand corrected. There had been indeed a report last year, and that's the one that I was assuming on which there had been a problem, but that was a report in the Free Press in terms of problems, and we were never able to determine that these samples were taken under the proper conditions.

Our testing done at the laboratory has never shown that the levels were beyond acceptable so far, and hopefully our monitoring of these beaches this summer will also show that there are no problems hopefully . MR. A. KOVNATS: I just want to touch on lead poisoning. I'm not going to get into mercury pollution. That's the next section, so we'll just touch on lead poisoning just for a minute before we move on. I know that we've had some problems in some of foundries here in the city, and I know that they'v e been cleaned up. We did have a problem out in Weston with lead in the earth.

Has that all been cleaned up at this point? Did we find out where the lead contamination was coming from and did we get back the cost of the cleanup? HON. G. LECUYER: There was at least a second round of soil removing in the We ston area. We know that the problem originates primarily from automobiles using leaded fuels. Hopeful ly, we can say soon that that is a problem of the past. As th e member perhaps is aware, the Federal Government has announc ed that starting, I believe, in 1988, leaded fuels will be significantly reduced in the lead content.

We 've had problems with lead in a variety of foundries and in a plant in Winkler where one of the problems, by 1992 was the level of lead reduction indicated. There are two types of problems in the foundries. One is where old batteries were being broken up to recover the lead and dry old batteries, and that created lead dust in the air. lt's more of a workplace health problem in this particular regard. lt created some health problems for some of the workers.

That is still being monitored and there's a program in place which we can perhaps describe in greater detail when we get under Workplace Safety and Health, but basically the problem is under control. In regard to the foundr y in Winkler there, it was associated with rotor parts, casings, which had residues of lead coming from the use of fuels is what we estimate gave ris e to this problem. There again, no body suspected or anticipated a problem related to the recyc ling and breaking down of casings, for instance motor casings, etc.

There were no expectations that this could give rise to a high level of lead into the plant but it did indeed and fortunately we suspect it has not created any permanently damaging effects on the health of the workers, but fortun ately the problem was identified soon, at source. MR. A. KOVNATS: We 'll bring that up under Wo rkplace Safety when we get to that. There's not going to be any greath length of questions. We can pass this item. MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. 2.(b)(1) - pass; 2.(b)(2) - pass. 2(c) - the member for Niakwa. MR. A.

KOVNATS: This is the Canada-Manitoba Mercury Agreement. lt stated, "coordinates of all activities being undertaken under the Canada-Manitoba Mercury Agreement which was developed to study the causes and implications of increased mercury levels in the environment of the Churchill River Diversion system." So that is the area on which we were talking about, and that's the high mercury level. Can the Minister or his department advise where this mercury is coming from? Is it just coming from the mercury in the soil that's dissolving into the water, into the Churchill River water system and causing the contamination?

HON. G. LECUYER: To make a statement in this regard in a conclusiv e manner is perhaps a bit early because the program, which was a three-year, four-year cost­ shared program within the province and the Federal Government, is now nearing completionf All that remains to be done is the report to be completed but we suspect, as has been suspected for some time, that this is naturally occurring in the soils of that region. MR. A. KOVNATS: Do we have any of the results of the mercury in the water system now, as to whether it has affected the fishing population in that area?

I don't know whether there's much commercial fishing in this particular area, but I do know that we're talking about an area where there is a great abunda nce of polar bears, which is a great tourist attraction of Northern Manitoba in the Churchill area. I think this is of a prime concern to protect those polar bears. Is there any danger of the mercury pollution affecting the polar bears? Now let's go one step further. This is the time of year, the last week in July and the first week in August, is the return of the beluga whales in the Churchill area.

Now is there going to be any affect on these beluga whales with the mercury contamination that's in the water, which is another great tourist attraction. My concern is the development of Northern Manitoba, Churchill, and I think that with the control of mercury in this area or finding out where it's coming from in the control that we can save this great heritage of the North, the beluga whales and the polar bears. HON. G. LECUYER: The level of mercury in fish in the Churchill River Diversion system was found to be as much as two parts per million in some instances,

whereas according to the Canadian gu idelines acceptable level is .5 parts per million, so it's four times higher than . . . The member will recall that in some cases people were warned not to eat fish as part of a daily level or as part of a staple diet. Some commercial fisheries were clos ed in this regard because the fish was not acceptable or did not pass the inspection standards of Canadian fisheries. We have no evidence as far as the monitoring that has taken place so far of problems as far as the polar bears are concerned or the beluga whales.

I'm further remind ed that the particular area where this problem was discovered and has been under study for a period of years of course is not at all in the region where it 1938

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 might affect polar bears or beluga whales. Yes indeed, it does eventually empty into the Hudson Bay but also becomes more highly diluted in the waters of the Hudson Bay. MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes. lt says the Churchill River Diversion system and I wasn't aware, I was really looking for some information and I've got the information and I'm not going to be able to sleep tonight about other problems, but this one has certainly been relieved in my mind. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(c)(1)-p ass; 2.(c)(2)- pass. 2.(

d) Dangerous Goods Inspectorate Training - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: What type of Dangerous Goods Inspectorate Training - I almost misread the word and I could just see people spitting all over the place. Wha t type of training comes under this Dangerous Goods Inspectorate Training? What is the program set up by the Provincial Government to train inspectors on the handling of dangerous goods, or the training so that they can inspect dangerous goods, the shipping of dangerous goods? HON. G.

LECUYER: There was some concern that I would continue to call the Brandon Fire Training College by that particular label. MR. A. KOVNATS: What is the correct label there? HON. G. LECUYER: I still assume that that was the correct label. I'm just being told it's called something else now. MR. A. KOVNATS: Brandon Fire Trai ning Centre? HON. G. LECUYER: Brandon Fire College is probably the correct appellation. MR. A. KOVNATS: Brandon Fire College is the correct term, I think. HON. G.

LECUYER: Under the transportation and handling of dangerous goods, with the new regulations being implemented Canada-wide to achieve some uniformity, it was determined, as a result of agreement with the Federal Government, that the training would be decentralized. We have need of training of our own environmental officers, public health officers, as well of course there is need to train the police enforcement bodies, the RCMP, the personnel in the firefi ghting departments at the municipal level. So far, somewhere around 200 people have been trained at the Fire College.

We have projections for training of some 250 more in 1986-87 - more than that, I'm sorry - close to some 400, to be more accurate; around 400 in 1986-87, and some 450 in 1987-88. MR. A. KOVNATS: Concerning the types of people that are being trained, I know that you've mentioned the police, and we're talking about the RCMP. What type of training are we giving the RCMP that they don't already have? Is this special training? Is it something special in training that the RCMP isn't trained to do at this point? Are we talking about people who work for the Federal Government at airports throughout all of Manitoba?

Are they trained to be able to recognize the dangers of the transportation of dangerous goods? Who's paying for the training of these people? I know that there's a lot of Federal Government people. Is this through the cooperation of the Federal Government that they're training their people and turning them over to us? They're not going to be in our employ but they will be at our call, if needed . Can the Minister bring me up-to-date on that type of the operation? MR. CHAIRMAN: I might point out to the member that under (

d) the entire amount seems to be Recoverable from the Government of Canada. MR. A. KOVNATS: We 're only talking about $300,000 and, you know, we're talking about 450 inspectors in one year. lt can't be their salary. HON. G. LECUYER: Some of the staff were trained in Ottawa, originally , basically to be in a position to provide the training to other staff in the department. The RCMP need to understand the manifest system that will be in use, the placarding, the type of chemicals that are associated with this type of system, and how to cope in cases where accidents occur on the highways.

Firefighters and airport firefighters have to be able to ur.de rstand that system and know how to cope with situations where accidents could occur. That is why the training is being provided.

The member is asking whether that training is being provided at our cost or at federal cost or if there was an agreement that was arrived at. lt's still not finalized, it's still being negotiated, but the ongoing negotiations which occurred with the various Provincial Governments and with the Federal Government under this in the impl ementation of this uniform system across the country would be that the training would be the resp onsibility of the Federal Government. MR. A. KOVNATS: We would assume the ongoing operation.

This isn't going to be another one of those situations where we're going to blame the Federal Government for a program that we've got and the lack of cooperation from the Federal Gov ernment in implementing the program. I would hope that that's not the case. I think that I confused myself when I was asking the que stion. When we're talking about training of inspectors under The Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, I think when we're talking about inspectors, I don't think we're talking about people that have to go in and fight fires or get involved with the actual cleanup of dangerous goods.

Or am I still being confused? I think it's just the inspectors to see that - what do they call those - the waybills that cover what is in the load are done correct ly, and things of that nature. I think that's what the inspectors will be doing. I don't think that we're really looking to train people to handle chemical spills or PCB spills on the highway. I think all we're looking at is people who can report that it's happened. Am I correct in assuming so? 1939

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 HON. G. LECUYER: We're looking at both because as part of their responsibilities, for instance, fire chiefs, fire departments do carry on inspections in buildings. They will, as part of those inspections, encou nter, for instance, chemicals. They should be able to recognize what these are, what should be the proper handling conditions for these types of chemicals.

On the other hand, they may be called upon to fight a fire and should also know, if the labelling and the placarding is in place, as it will have to be, then they will be able to recognize that and take the proper precautions and measures to protect their own health and protect the surrounding environment. So it applies under both circumstances. As far as the cost of the training, the member says, yes, indeed, is we are cooperating. Many of these operations, the member can appr eciate, whether it's related with interprovincial transport, or rail transport, or air transport, these come under federal jurisdiction.

That is the reason why, of course, they would also be getting some of the benefits not only from the training of federal personnel, the RCMP for instance, but we will also, under this type of agreement, assume lead resp onsibility even for those spills which occur in areas that come under federal jurisdiction. So they will also, with us, get some of the benefits that come as a result, of course, of this training. MR. A. KOYNATS: I had checked this out through the Federal Government before we came into committee, Mr. Minister.

I wasn't trying to catch the Minister under any circumstances, but it does relieve my mind. This is such a big factor when we talk about the air and on water and on land. lt is a big area and it's such an important area. I would just like to commend the Federal Government and the Provincial Government for the cooperation in seeing that it gets off the ground in the proper manner. HON. G. LECUYER: I have to add a bit of a caution ary note for the Member for Niakwa in this regard. We hope that we will eventually sign this agreement. We haven't reached that point yet; negotiations are still ongoing.

I expect and I hope that we will reach some agreement soon down the road. I suspect that that will happen. lt's not an agreement that has been ratified yet. MR. A. KOYNATS: Might I suggest that when this agreement is signed that the Minister of Highways be all owed to stand in and watch so that he can take credit for the actual cooperation between the two parties as he's done in other cases -(Interject ion)-Wel l, I got mad at him the other day. We can pass this item. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for lnks ter. MR. D. SCOTT: I just have a question, Mr. Chairman, on this.

Within this, does the inspector training cover the dri vers as well, the truck dri vers? HON. G. LECUYER: The Manitoba Trucking Association has put in place its own training program for truckers. MR. D. SCOTT: Okay. Something that some truckers have brought to my attention is that I beli eve the truckers have to sign a bill of lading or some sort of thing to recognize that they know what cargo is on board. Is that true? HON. G. LECUYER: There's a regulation which is not yet in place, which will be called the manifest system and we're only talking about hazardous wastes here, which will apply.

I don't want to enter into the details, but the manifest system will follow these hazardous wastes from the time they leave the plant where they were manufactured, through the transport process, through to the plants that will use these hazardous su bstances in various processes and there will be registration of the generators of these substances. MR. D. SCOTT: On that, is there any requirement for the people signing these things to have an ability to understand what they mean? HON. G. LECUYER: Wel l, that's why they are being trained.

Yes, to be a trans porter, for instance, one has to be certified as having been trained by the emplo yer. MR. D. SCOTT: So that those people will be able to read English or French and understand the directions? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes, it is assumed that they will be able to do that because otherwise they should not be certified. MR. D.

SCOTT: lt's my understanding that, although the manifest system isn't in place yet, there had been people, I'm told by some truckers, who are signing the goods and not understanding what is behind them and that they can sign something but they can't understand what they're signing. lt doesn't really protect the public very much so I would suggest that there be some literacy and fluency in understanding instructions to go along with the placarding and the manifest system. HON. G.

LECUYER: We ll I don't know of any problems in that regard so far, and if the member knows of any particular one, I would appreciate hearing about it and then we can look into it. I certainly expect that if there are problems in that regard, they will be discovered when the training is provided because the emplo yer will then find out whether his truck driver has a literacy problem in that reg ard. lt surely then becomes his resp onsibil ity not to cert ify him to transpor t the hazardous goods. That does not preclude him from transporting every thing else. MR. D.

SCOTT: What happens when your firms may have a predominance of driv ers who may be relatively recent immigrants, or not even that recent immigrants to the countr y, or people who just are ill iterate, from driving? HON. G. LECUYER: I think I've answered that, Mr. Chairman. I said that they should not be certified to transport hazardous goods. Hopefully they will not be because the penalties under the act are also fairly severe. MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes, I'm going to take the prerogative of asking a question that I thought maybe 1940

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 the Honourable Member for Rupertsland might have asked, because I know that there's big development in the North, particularly in the Limestone area, and we are training Native Northerners to work in that Limestone area and I think some of the jobs would be to drive big vehicles which could be the transportation of hazardous goods. I would think that some of these Northern Natives might not be able to communicate in either Engl ish or Fr ench. They will be able to communic ate in their own lan gua ge and that's compl etely acceptable to me.

Why wouldn't they be given the privilege of being able to transport this type of equipment, with the proper training, and not be hinder ed just by not being able to speak English or French? HON. G. LECUYER: I don't know if that situation might arise. I don't know to what extent hazardous substances would be transported for that project; there certainly will be some. Hop efully , those who will transport them will be able to handle the manifest system. Another thing is that the people who are being hired are receiving some training.

We are also providing some Workplace Safety and Health training as part of that overall training component. People who will be required, for instance, to transport hazardous substances, I'm sure the answer I can provide is the same as I provided for the member awhile ago. The employP.r has a responsibility to ensure that they unde rstand they are able to meet the re quir ements of the system. MR. A. KOVNATS: Can the Honourable Minister advise whether there's any Native Northerners that have been hired in this Inspectorate Training Program? HON. G.

LECUYER: We're not hiring anybody under the Inspectorate Tra ining Program. We're taking staff within the department; inspection officers, public health officers, Highways Inspection Branch, firefighters; and at the municipal level, the police force, the RC MP, who will be trained. These are existing empl oyees under various jurisdictions and various capacities but it doesn't imply hiring any additional people to actually carry on the inspection. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Resolution No. 63: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majest y, a sum not exce eding $7, 145,900 for Environment and Workpla ce Safety and Health, Environmental Management for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1987- pass. Committee rise. SUPPLY - HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: This

section of the Committee of Supply has been considering the Estimates of the Department of Health. We are now on Item No. 1.(d)

(1) Communications: Salaries -pa ss. 1.(d)(2)- the Member for River East had a question. MRS. B. MITCH ELSON : Mr . Chairman, un der Communications, there's no line for Salaries. Can the Minister tell me what this . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: We are on now on Item 1.(d)(2). MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Oh, Other Expenditures, okay. Mr. Chairman, can the Minister tell me, then, seeing there are no salaries for this department, exactly what this department does? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. L. DESJARDINS: I've got to watch. I was going to tell, before my friend came in, that we had no apple polishers.

But I guess we haven't got one; that's why there's no pay. That doesn't mean that we don't do the work. You've seen some of the expenses that are there. That is to do the work, and we do it in-house. Of course, we have access to the central - we coordinate with all the announc ements of government, but we have none with the department. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, is the Minister indic at ing that, under this lin e, this is the entire Communications area for the Department of Health? lt says, "development of communications." Is he saying that this is the only place that he has communications, press release ability? HON. L. DESJARDINS: No, it isn't. Of course, you have the Commission. We have found anyway that, in this department, it is rather difficult because things seem to happen so fast and it's so diversified and so on that probably the news would come in after a couple of days or so if you had to rely on the one person that's on.

So we're all part of it, with the staff. There are some at the Commission. Of course, later on you will see, under Health Promotion also, they would also help with the