Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 39 (27th Legislature, 5th Session)

27-5-39

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2: 30 o'clock, Monday, March 14, 1966 Opening Prayer by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions Reading and Receiving Petitions Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committee Notices of Motion Introduction of Bills 893 MADAM SPEAKER: Before the Orders of the Day, I would like to attract your attention to the gallery where there are some 23 Grade 5 students from the Robert H. Smith School under the direction of their teacher, Mr. Trow. This school is situated in the constituency of the Honourable the Provincial Secretary.

There are some 60 Grade 11 students from the Garden City School under the direction of Mr. Solar. This school is situated in the constitu ency of the Honourable the Member for Seven Oaks. On behalf of all members of this Legis� lative Assembly, I welcome you. HON. GEORGE HUTTON (Minister of Agriculture and Conservation) (Rockwood Iberville): Madam Speaker, I would like to make an announcement to the H�use at this time.

We all know that the taxpayers of Manitoba have put a considerable amount of money into agri cultural research in the form of Capital Grants for buildings and facilities and also annually we vote a very substantial sum for current research programs. It's nice to have a harvest once in a while, having sewn so much seed, and today I can announce that there has been a further development in the breeding of rapeseed at the university. A new variety has been licensed by the.

Government of Canada and a limited amount of this new variety of rapeseed will be made available to farmers in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta through the Soils and Crops Branch of the Manitoba Department of Agriculture and Conservation. The name of the new variety is "Target. 11 That 1s a pretty good designation in this day and age of moon-shots, etc. Target was developed by Professor B. R. Stephenson of the Plant Science Department of the University of Manitoba by individual plant selections from the variety 11Tanka.

" You will recall two or three years ago I made an announcement in the House with respect to Tanka and we had a sample that we passed around. Well this is a further selection from the variety Tanka. Selection was based on seed size, yield of seed, earliness and other agronomic· characteristics. Target has substantially outyielded other varieties such as Tanka,, Nugget and Golden. In ad dition, both the oil content of the seed and the protein content of the meal are higher than the other varieties mentioned.

The increased protein content is an important consideration to seed manufacturers and this is particularly true of a large part of the product that is going into the export market. Another important point is that Target flowers four days earlier than Golden, Nugget or Tanka, and matures up to three days earlier than these varieties. It is expected that Target will replace Tanka as well as the ·other varieties. Foundation seed of the new variety is being distributed through the Soils and Crops Branch, Manitoba Department of Agriculture and Conservation, 702 Norquay Building, Winnipeg 1, Manitoba.

Cost of the seed is $1. 00 per pound. The seed will be sold-in 50 pound lots with a maximum of 200 lbs. for each applicant. Cheques or money orders should be made payable to the Honourable the Provincial Treasurer, Provii_we of Manitoba. The seed available for dis tribution is some 7, 000 lbs. of foundation, sufficient breeder seed for at least four growers in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta growers as they may require it. The suggested foundation seed distribution in Manitoba - 4, 000 lbs, Saskatchewan - 2, 000 lbs, Alberta - 1, 000 lbs.

The distribution is on a first-come basis by the Soils and Crops Bran eh. MR. GILDAS MOLGAT (Leader of the Opposition) (Ste. Rose): Madam Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture relative to his statement, Madam Speak er. I missed whether he said anything about the oil content of the seed. I noticed the protein content. What does it mean so far as oil content? MR. HUTTON: The oil content - the yield in oil is higher than any of the varieties we have had to date, MR. MOLGAT: I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture.

In view of the fact that the Red River didn •t freeze certainly through certain sections of Winnipeg until very late this year - it was into January - and with the heavy snow cover it is likely the ice is quite thin, is there any consideration being given to opening up the channel so that the river can flow more freely and start flowing very soon and so reduce the flood danger?

894 March 14, 1966 MR. HUTTON: No. In view ofthe fact that the ice skin on the river 'is relatively light compared with other years, we don •t anticipate any' problem in respect to the ice-back. MR. MOLGAT : Madam Speaker, would there not be an advantage though tohave it flow very early if it is thin? Could we not do something to get it clear now, or in the fairly new future, and thereby take away more of the water earlier? MR. HUTTON: Madam Speaker, this is an argument that I can't pursue. with the Honour able Leader of the Opposition.

My information is that we a,re fortunate, in view of all the un favourable data that we have been gathering, we are fortunate in this respect, that we have a thinner layer. of ice than before and we don •t anticipate that aspect of the flooding problem to be too important. MR. MARK SMERCHANSKI (Burrows): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to direct a further question to the Honourable Minister of Agriculture.

Up in the north we were able to encourage the break-up of lakes up to ten days in advance of the normal break-up by putting either ashes or any black earth on the ice surface, and I was wondering if there has been anybody that has made this suggestion and has this .been tried, because in view of the fact .that it does encourage the break-up some ten to fourteen days in advance, is there any reason why this shot�.ld not be tried? I understand it's not too expensive. Has the Honourable Minister given any consideration to this? MR.

HUTTON: Yes, I have discussed the use of either salt or charcoal with the engineers with respect to this. problem but there is no decision that we have reached in respect to it, and as I say, this year the ice factor is not the important factor. Under some conditions it could be very useful, but from the information that we have, it would appear that this is a very minor factor in the problem we have to face. MR. SMERCHANSKI: Another question, Madam Speaker.

I would imagine that the run off would be a very important factor, . to get it as early as possible, therefore could the Honour able Minister tell us as to the reason of the engineers' feeling that this is rather unimportant in view of the light skin of ice on the rivers. What is their reason for saying this is unimportant, because I do feel that a great deal of importance should be attached to this. MH. HUTTON: The ice will be gone out of the river by the time that the flood peak ar rives here. This is why it isn •t a significant factor in identifying the dimensions of our prob lem.

By the time the southern water, which is our real problem, gets here, the channel will be clear, and especially this year with the thin layer of ice that we have. MR. SMERCHANSKI: Madam Speaker, a further question on that. Does that mean then that the Honourable Minister is suggesting that as far as the local run-off is concerned, it will all be taken care of before the flood waters arrive in Winnipeg? Is this correct? MR. HUTTON: Madam Speaker, I did not say that all the local run-off will have taken place. All the local run-off is not going to be affected by the ice in the rivers.

It will take warm conditions to melt the snow and the ice in the country-side in our part of the watershed and get it into the rivers. That same kind of weather that will convert the snow to water and get it running will convert the ice in the river to water. Now to say that all of our water will be gone before the :southern water hits us -n o one can make that prediction. We.should hope that this should happen, but the fact is that it's when we get weather conditions that bring about a simultaneous or a coincidence of circumstances, this is when you get a flood problem. MR. ELMAN GUTTORMSON (St.

George): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to direct a question to the First Minister. Is it true that the Monoca A. G. is a sub sidiary of a U. S. space firm? And if so, could he tell us the name of this firm? HON. DUFF ROBLIN (Premier) (Wolseley): There 's no information I can give my honour able friend on that subject. HON. MAITLAND STEINKOPF, Q. C. (Provincial Secretary) (River Heights): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to table a Return to an Address for Papers, No. 3, under date of February 23 on motion of Mr. Peters -o r Mr.

Paulley, the Honourable Member for Radisson. And also, a Return to an Order of the House No. 11 on a motion of the Honourable Member from Radisson; a Return to an Order of the House No. 12 on a motion of the Honourable Member from Radisson; and a Return to an Order of the House No. 13 on the motion of the Honourable Member from Radisson. MR. RUSSELL PAULLEY (Leader of the New Democratic Party) (Radisson): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I would like to direct a question to the Honourable Minister of Labour.

The Throne Speech contained references to The Vacations with Pay Act and The Workmen's Compensation Act. I wonder if my honourable friend can indicate how quickly I

March 14, 1966 (MR. PAULLEY cont•d.) the House will be in possession of iegislation dealing with these two matters? HON. OBIE BAIZLEY (Minister of Labour) (Osbotne): I can only tell my hcino'urable friend - shortly, Madam Speaker. I expect them from the printers any day. .· MR. GORDON E. JOHNSTON (Portage la Prairie): Madam Speaker, I would like to ad dress two questions to the Honourable Minister of Education.

Is the Honourable Minister aware that with respect to the Fannystelle School problem that he has, that the Defehr family are sending their children ll miles to another school at a cost of $49.00 a month plus transp<>rta tion? The second question is, is he going to enforce The Public Sehool Act at the Fapnystelle School? · · · HON. GEORGE JOHNSON (Minister of Education) (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I have an inquiry being conducted. I enquired over the weekend and I was advised that I would have it tomorrow or the next day.

ORDERS OF THE DAY MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable the Member for Portage la Prairie. The Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. MR. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, members of my group have spoken on a number of occasions on this Order for Return and similar orders where the government is refusing to give what we consider to be perfectly legitimate information that the members of this House are entitled to have.

Some of my colleagues have shown that members on the opposite side apparently have been able to get the information because they have used it in the course of de bates, proving or disproving certain statements that have been made or certain proposals that were made by ourselves by way of resolutions, particularly with regard to No. 1 Highway be tween here and Portage la Prairie. It appears that the government has also given .this information to other bodies. We do not as yet have the reply insofar as our questions for an Ord<.r for Return in ·regard to-corres- pondence with the ....... corporations.

I understand that a number. of the municipal corpora- tions have obtained this information and it's perfectly proper that they should. Any municipal corporation through which a highway goes or where there •s a particular road or bridge problem should be entitled to have this information. Surely then, Madam Speaker, so should the members of this House. What can possibly be secret in information that the government gathers about the number of vehicles that are using certain roads? What could possibly make this a purely internal matter for the govern ment?

Why has this position been taken by this government, because it is a fact, Madam Speaker, that in previous days when there was another government on the far side, that informa tion was given to the members of the House, and I have here with me the types of document that was at that time given to members of the House regardless of what side they sat on. This is a report - Diagromatic Traffic Flow Map, Department of Public Works, Highways Branch, 1956.

There it was, Madam Speaker, outlining the traffic on eve:ry one of the highways of the province, giving the relative importance by the thickness of �he black line, giving it in addition by a numerical figure, giving the average over a certain period of time. For the· City of Winnipeg, because of the largest flows of traffic in the immediate vicinity, there was a special blow-up map showing exactly that section. Now why, Madam Speaker, if this was valid information in 1956, given to members of this House, why should it now become a great secret? Why should members of the House be denied this information?

There could only be one conclusion, Madam Speaker, for the insistence of the government, and that is that they are not following this one factor insofar as their road construction. Why else do they want to hide this information? I'm not suggesting that traffic flows are the only consideration in highway construction; obviously there are others in this question of giving service to various parts of the province. Quite obviously if there is no high way at all, you can't have a traffic count, and therefore if you based it strictly on traffic counts, isolated areas would not be obtaining any highway construction.

My group are not saying that this should be the only criteria, but surely, Madam Speaker, it is one of the criteria. It is one of the criteria that the members are entitled to have. Let me point out again to the government a resolution that was presented to this House by one of my members some four years ago. It was a resolution that No. 1 Highway between here and Portage la Prairie, one that is known as the death strip in Manitoba, should have been built into a separated grade with four lanes. The government voted against it. If my memory serves

896 March 14, 1966 (MR. MOLGAT cont'd.) .. .. me right, we brought it in a second year. We were unable, Madam Speaker, to get the figures. We couldn't prove how many cars went over that highway; we couldn't stand in this House and say, "There's the traffic flow on that highway by compari son to others where you have proceeded to double lanes or where you are proceeding with im provements on highways very close to one another. 1' It would have been in the advantage to the people of Manitoba had we had that information, because we could have made our case that much clearer.

The information that we had was, unfortunately, the number of people who died and were injured on that strip of highwa:y. Those were the statistics that we had to de pend on to make our case. The government voted against that resolution - voted against it. Undoubtedly they had the information, but they wouldn •t give it to us. Then what happens? Lo and behold, a very few months later, the government announces a crash program to build a highway to Portage la Prairie, a crash program that they had voted against on two previous occasions when the program should have been started.

How many people died in the interval? Wouldn't it have been better if the government had accepted this in the first place? Wouldn't it have been better if the members of this House had in fact this information, so that the Minister couldn 1t say, '•It isn 1t necessary to build that highway. '' Manitoba would have been better off had the government not taken the position that it took in this regard.

I say to the government now, this is information that we are entitled to have; it is in formation that would be of value to the House and of value to the people of Manitoba; and when they deny these figures, they can leave only one conclusion in the minds of the public and that I is that they are deiiberately hidin g these figures, that they are hiding them - for what purpose. The only other conclusion is that they are hiding them because they are not followiJ1g this as an index to highway construction.

They have other indices that they prefer to follow, and this I one, which is part of a sound program, they refuse to divulge to us. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion lost. MR. MOLGAT: Yeas and Nays, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the members. The question before the House, the proposed motion of the Honounibie Member for Portage la Prairie that an Order of the Hou$e do issue for a Return showing: All traffic counts taken on Provincial Road No. 242, between P. T. H. No. 1a nd P.T.H. No. 2f or theyearsl 964 and 1965.

A standing vote was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs. Barkman, Campbell, Cherniack, Desjardins, Froese, Guttormson, Harris, Johnston, Molgat, Patrick, Paulley, Peters, Shoemaker, Smerchanski, Tanchak, Vielfaure and Wright. NAYS: Messrs. Baizley, Bea�d, Bilton, Bjornson, Carroll, Cowan, Evans, Hamilton, Harrison, Hutton, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym, Lyon, McDonald, McGregor, McKellar, McLean, Martin, Mills, Moeller, Roblin, Seaborn, Shewman, Stanes, Steinkopf, Strickland, Watt, Weir, Witney and Mrs. Morrison. MR. CLERK: Yeas, 17; nays, 31. MADAM SPEAKER:. I declare the motion lost.

The Address for ·Papers standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Elmwood, that a humble address do go to .His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor for a Return showing all correspondence between the Government of the Province of. Manitoba and the Canadian National Railways relative to the establishment of an integrated forest industry an nounced by the Government on March 8, 19 66.

(2) Copies of all correspondence between the Government of the Province of Manitoba and the National Harbors Board relative to the above.

(3) Copies of all correspondence between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Province of Manitoba relative to the above and showing in particular requests for: (

a) financial aid in road construction, (

b) financial aid in forest inventory, and (

c) reduced freight rates. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. ROBLIN: Madam, subject to the usual reservations, we'd be glad to accept the question. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Address for Papers standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. JOHNSTON: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Assiniboia, that an humble address be voted to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, praying

March 14, 1966 897 (MR. JOHNSTON cont•d.) for copies of all correspondence between the Department of Mines and Natural Resources and (

a) North American Wild Life Foundation for the years, 1962, 1963, 1964 and 196 5, (

b) Ducks Unlimited (Canada) for the years 1962, 1963, 1964 and l!l 65, and (

c) Ducks Unlimited (USA) for the years 196 2, 1963, 1964 and 196 5. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. JOHNSTON: Madam Speaker, I would like to remind the House and the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources that this Address was accepted last year - last session - and I believe there was quite a length of time to answer the Address last year. Can the Minister or the First Minister give us assurance that this order will be answered this session? MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote deelared the motion carried.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Gladstone. MR. NELSON SHOEMAKER (Gladstone): Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. Boniface, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing:

(1) The number of automobiles, trucks, and other vehicles owned by the government or any Crown Corporation as of July 1st, 19 58, and as of December 31 st, 196 5.

(2) The number of operators of the said vehicles.

(3) Policy of the government in respect to purchasing ve hicles and length of time they are used before being replaced.

(4) What restrictions are placed on the use of government vehicles when used by a government employee for his private u�se.

(5) Is it permissible for members of employees' families to use the government car. If so, under what circumstances.

(6) Number of vehicles rented by the government or any Crown Corporation or Agency for the year ending December 31 st, 19 65, and total cost of same. MADAM SPEAKERpresented the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Gladstone. MR. SHOEMAKER: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. Boniface, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing the details of all land and building -- Pardon me, I guess I have the wrong one, I've got two or three in there.

Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. Boniface, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: (

a) The number of loans made in 1965 by the Manitoba Development Fund in excess of $1 million. (

b) The number of loans in excess of $i million. (

c) The number of loans in excess of $100, 000. (

d) The number of loans in excess of $25, 000. (

e) The number of loans under $25, 000. (

f) The number of loans under $10, 000. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. HON. GURNEY EVANS (Minister of Industry and Commerce) (Fort Rouge): Madam Speaker, I'd be very glad to provide the information. I•ll request the Manitoba Development Fund to provide it right away. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote deelared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Portage la Prairie. MR.

JOHNSTON: I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Assiniboia, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: (1 ) What flood-fighting material and amounts or numbers of each of the following: A. Sand, gravel, clay; B. Sandbags; C. Tools and equip ment; D. Dynamite; E. Boats; and F. Other equipment; have been stockpiled at Portage la Prairie, Oakville, Elie, Morris, St. Jean and Greater Winnipeg, {

a) as of March 1st, 1966 and (

b) as of March 7th, 1966. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. ROBLIN: Madam Speaker, insofar as this is question that refers to provincial materials, we'll be glad to accept the question. Of course we can accept no responsibility for getting the answers in respect to municipal or private stockpiling. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote deelared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR.

PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: (1 ) Copies of all agreements between Monoca, A. G. St. Moritz and the Government of the Province of Manitoba relative to the development of an integrated forest industry in Northern Manitoba as announced by the government March 8, 1966.

(2) Copies of all agreements between any municipality,

898 March 14, 1966 (MR. PAULLEY cont•d. ) .•... organized or unorganized, or local government district, and Monoca, A. G. relative to the above. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. ROBLIN: Madam Speaker, only one question arises and that is whether we have in our possession the agreement between the municipalities and the company. Insofar as we have them we1 ll provide it. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR.

PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Logan, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing:

(1) Estimated costs of road construction required for the development of an integrated forest industry as referred to in the announcement by the government on March 8, 1966.

(2) Estimated costs of forest sur veys and forest inventories to be undertaken by the government in Northern Ma.1itoba referred to in above mentioned announcement.

(3) Estimated increased costs for fire protection in areas referred to above. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to . move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Elmwood, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing:

(1) Stumpage charges now being levied on cutters in the various areas of Manitoba.

(2) Costs of fire protection, if any, borne by any timber operators or pulp mills in Manitoba at present.

(3) How are costs of access roads in present timber areas paid for. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party .. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: (

l) Copies of all correspondence between Monoca A. G. and/or Churchill Forest Industries (Man. ) and each of the following departments of government:

(1) Mines and Natural Resources.

(2) Municipal Affairs.

(3) Industry and Commerce.

(4) Education.

(5) Highways. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the"name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Logan, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: Copies of all agreements between Manitoba Hydro and Churchill Forest Industries (Man. ) Limited relative to power sup plies for an integrated forest industry in Northern Manitoba. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR.

STEINKOPF: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Minister of Labour, that this matter be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAF.ER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Elmwood, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showi ng: (1.) Copies Df all cor respondence between the Government of the Province of Manitoba and the Manitoba Development Fund relative to Monoca A, G.

Moritz and/or Churchill Forest Industries (Manitoba) regarding construction of an integrated forest industry in Manitoba.

(2) Copies of all correspondence between the Minister of Industry and Commerce and his Deputy Minister regarding the above. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. ROBLIN: Madam Speaker, insofar as the questions may be answered under the statute and do not refer to privileged matters, we accept the order. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. I

March 14, 1966 899 MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Elmwood, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing:

(1) Dates of meetings held between representatives of Monoca, A. G. St. Moritz and representatives of Manitoba at The Pas, Thompson, Churchill, Winnipeg and New York regarding the development of an in tegrated forest industry in Manitoba.

(2) The names of representatives for Manitoba at each of the above mentioned meetings.

(3) The names of Manitoba representatives other than the Premier who attended meetings in Zurich, Switzerland with the President of Monoca A. G.

(4) Copy of letter of commitment by company dated March 6, 1966. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. ROBLIN: Madam Speaker, we accept the motion subject to the question of privilege and also subject to the protection of the anonymity of members of the Civil Service. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Assiniboia. MR. STEVE PATRICK (Assiniboia): Madam Speaker, I be1� to move, seconded by the Honourable the Member for Portage la Prairie, that an Order of the House do issue for a Re turn showing:

(1) Whether land has been acquired for an overpass at the junction of No. 1 Trans-Canada Highway west, and the Perimeter Highway.

(2) What the size and legal descrip tion of the land is.

(3) From whom each parcel was purchased.

(4) When it was.purchased.

(5) The amount paid for each parcel.

(6) Whether all the land required has been purchased. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. HON. WALTER WEIR (Minister of Public Works) (Minnedosa): Madam Speaker, I'll be happy to accept the. order subject to matters that are still under negotiation. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Portage la .Prairie. MR. JOHNSTON: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Assiniboia, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing:

(1) The total amount of Provincial Highway Contracts awarded to Stratton Engineering for work in the area of the Perimeter Highway and the Trans-Canada Highway East.

(2) The date on which the contract was awarded.

(3) The dates on which this work was to commence and to be completed.

(4) The penalties, if any, for non-comp letion.

(5) Whether the penalties were applied.

(6) The amounts paid to Stratton Engineering or to others on their behalf and the dates on which they were paid.

(7) The amounts of holdbacks retained by the Manitoba Government and the dates the holdbacks were made.

(8) The disposition of these holdbacks showing the name of those to whom they were paid and the dates on which they were paid. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for a Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. MR. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Member for Lakeside, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing the details of all land and building appraisals made by, or on behalf of, the Government of Manitoba, of the properties known as the Bain Estate, since 1960, showing in particular:

(1) The date on which the ap praisals were made.

(2) By whom the appraisals were made. (:3) The qualifications of the ap praisers at the time the appraisals were made.

(4) Whether in all cases , the appraisers were accredited appraisers.

(5) What the basis of payment was (fee, per diem, or what).

(6) How much was paid for the work.

(7) The description of the property appraised.

(8) What appraisal values were indicated for the various parcels of land and buildin,gs appraised. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. EVANS: Madam Speaker, the government is glad to accept this order subject to any privileged items or if there should be any items still under negotiation. MR. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for his statement in this regard. I'd like to point out that this was an Order that was moved last year on the 22nd of March and it was accepted by the government.

The House sat then until the 11th day of May and undoubtedly a good deal of the information between the 22nd of March and the 11th of May must have been ac cumulated. There was a further point, Madam Speaker, that when the House rose, or shortly

900 March 14, 1966 (MR. MOLGAT cont'd.) ..... before it rose, we asked at that time what the disposition was going to be of any outstanding orders, and at that time on a statement by yourself, you were to take this matter under consideration. The House rose before we had any report from you. At subsequent meetings of the Statutory Orders and Regulations Committee, my col league the Honourable Member for Lakeside and myself brought up the matter of these out standing Addresses for Papers and Orders for Return. I pointed out that the Ottawa procedure as laid down in Beauchesne was that the Returns did not lapse.

They were not given to the parties or to the House members in between Sessions, but they were tabled at the next follow ing Session. The members of the government at that time suggested that this should be looked into and there was some correspondence between the Clerk of the House and Ottawa in this re gard. The first letter was inconclusive and the second letter clearly indicated that Ottawa followed that practise.

In view of this, the fact that these Orders and some of the others that have been moved today by my colleagues were on the Order Paper last year, that undoubtedly the govern ment proceeded then to get the information and to get the authorization where Addresses for Papers were involving other people. The fact that, until the House sat this year, there had been no indication that these papers or these returns should not be submitted at this Session, I trust that the government really has all of the information now complete, because there has been ample time.

So I would hope that we would be able to get the answers to these particular circumstances within a very few days. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. MR.

MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Member for Lakeside, that an Order of the House showing: ( 1) Details of all land and building appraisals made by or on behalf of the Government of Manitoba, of properties in the Arts Centre area and · in the redevelopment area south of the CPR line and east of Main Street, showing in particular: (

a) the date on which the appraisals were made; (

b) by whom the appraisals were made; (

c) the qualifications of the appraisers at the time the appraisals were made; (

d) whether in all cases the appraisers were accredited appraisers; (

e) what the basis of payment was (fee, per diem, or what); (

f) how much was paid for the work; (

g) the description of the property appraised; and (

h) what appraisal values were indicated for the various parcels of land and buildings ap praised.

(2) Whether any appraisals are presently being carried on, and (

a) by whom the ap praisals are being made; (

b) what the basis of payment is (fee, per diem, or what); and (

c) how much is being paid for the work. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. STEINKOPF: Madam Speaker, we will accept this Order except for matters that are privileged or presently under negotiation. MR. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, I would like to make the very brief observation that the same applies to this Order as to the previous one I passed. It was accepted on the 22nd of March, 1965. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Gladstone.

MR: SHOEMAKER: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Member for St. Boniface, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing the details of all land and building appraisals made by, or on behalf of, the Government of Manitoba, of the properties in the area of the Oak Lake Project and Pipestone Creek, showing in particular: (

a) the date on which the appraisals were made; (

b) by whom the appraisals were niade; (

c) the qualifications of the appraisers at the time the appraisals were made; (

d) whether in all cases, the appraisers were accredited appraisers; (

e) what the basis of payment was (fee, per diem, or what); (

f) how much was paid for the work; (

g) the description of the property appraised; and (

h) what appraisal values were indicated for the various parcels of land and buildings ap praised. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. EV ANS: Madam Speaker, this Order can be accepted subject to reservation for any items that may be privileged or under negotiation. MR. SHOE MAKER: What my honourable leader said in respect to the two previous Orders for Return also applies to this one. I find on checking the journals that this Order went in exactly I I , I I -

March 14, 1966 901 (MR. SHOEMAKER cont' d. ) ..... the way that it is today on April 30th, 1965, so that is nearly 10 months ago and it is to be hoped that we can have this information before the election. I suspect that some of the Orders will be withheld because of the e1eetion, but I sincerely hope that inasmuch as this one has been in for 10 months, that we can expect to have it shortly. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote deelared the motion earried, MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for St. Boniface. MR. LAURENT DESJARDINS (St.

Boniface): Madam Speaker, I would like to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Gladstone, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing:

(1) Maps indicating the proposed boundaries of the Birds Hill Park.

(2) Maps showing the land owned by the Manitoba Government at April 1, 1960, at April 1, 1962, as well as at April 1, 1964, within these boundaries.

(3) Maps showing the land owned by the Munici palities at April 1, 1960, at April 1, 1962, as well as April 1, 1964, within these boundaries. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. DESJARD�NS: Madam Speaker, I would also like to give the information that this was asked las t year and was passed on May lst, 1965. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the second reading of Bill No. 7. The Honourable the Attorney-General. HON. STEW ART E� McLEAN, Q.

C. (Attorney-General) (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, may I have the leave of the House to have this item stand? MADAM SPEAKER: The second reading of Bill No. 20. The Honourable the .Attorney General. MR. McLEAN presented Bill No. 20,

an Act to amend the Public Libraries Act, for second reading. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. McLEAN: Madam Speaker, there are in essence two things provided for in this Bill. One has to do with the matter of the quorum of a Board of the Library, and the second having to do with the date on which the estimated expenditures of the Library are to be sub mitted, and members will note that the proposal is to alter the date from the 30th of November to the 15t h of January. This change is made at the request of the Library Association.

They have found it somewhat difficult to anticipate their requirements as far in advance as the 30th of November because it relates to the next following year and it is considered advisable to alter it in the way that is provided for in the Bill, the proposed expenditures of course that are submitted by the 15th of January as provided for in the proposed amendment relating to the year which will have commenced on the 1st of January. The more substantive matter is that respecting the formation of Library Federations and I would like to say a word or two about it.

One of the problems as the programs of municipal and regional libraries have developed throughout the province has been the problem of having a sufficiently large number of people within the boundaries of a municipal library or a regional library to warrant the expenditures for qooks and professional services that would make for the best library services, and in this matter there has been a difference of opinion between the - if I may use the expression - professional librarians who understand the kind of service that they would like to provide, and the very real service that is provided by the municipal and regional libraries even though they may be small in terms of population and in terms of income, and there has been a good deal of debate about what ought to be done concerning this situation.

It seemed unwise to alter the legislation that would make it a requirement to have a public library that, for example the population ought not to be not le ss than 25, 000, because that would rule out in many instances, for all practical purposes, the formation of a library service and also prevent people who are now under our present arrangements receiving library services, prevent them from having them, and I think that we may say that the municipal and regional libraries are performing a most worthwhile service for their people, particularly the regional libraries.

So, Madam Speaker, we have designed what we think will meet these two situations, by proposing by this legislation the formation of what might be called a Library Federation, and very briefly, it's simply a plan, design, to enable municipal and regional libraries, if they wish to do so, to enter into an agreement whereby they will form a Library Federation, which Library Federation will perform such functions for their individual member libraries as they may decide and as may be agreed to from time to time by the members of the Board of the

902 March 14, 1966 (MR. McLEAN cont 'd.) .••.. Federation. It is not possible of course to foresee all of the functions that might be performed by such a federation, although one may suggest as illustra tions, some of the functions that could well be performed. For example, a federation might employ one professional librarian who would give pro fessional advice and assistance to all of these member libraries within the federation.

That would be service which might not be possible for the individual libraries themselves, but which would be quite feasible if supported by a number of libraries who had entered into a federation. The same is true with respect to the ordering of books. Certain books might be ordered by the federation for and on behalf of their member libraries, and the processing, or cataloguing as I believe it is called, of the books might be performed for and on behalf of the member libraries but by the Library Federation, and other functions may be vismilized.

For example, another illustration is the possibility that a federation might, for example, purchase a bookmobile which would service a number of member libraries. That will indicate in a general way some of the things that might be done by a Library Federation on behalf of its member libraries. It will be noted that the formation of a federation is a purely voluntary matter and will be initiated by the Boards of Libraries - either municipal library or regional library - but in each instance will require the approval of the municipal councils who are represented in the re spective libraries.

This has been done because it will always be remembered that our public libraries are based in relation to our municipalities. They are formed by petitions in local municipalities or groups of local municipalities and there are votes taken of the people in the municipal corporation, and each municipality within a library is represented on the board of that library by one of its own elected members being a member of the Library Board.

So it is quite clear in the legislation that while the idea of joining a federation or forming a federation may be initiated by the Library Board itself - Library Board - they do require the approval of their respective municipal councils in order to proceed with the idea. Assuming that a federation is formed, it will be on the basis of an agreement between those libraries that have joined the federation and that agreement will be enforced for a term of five years. It may be renewed at the expiration of five years if that is the desire, or may dis continue with that if they desire it as well.

The federation will be managed by members who ate elected or appointed by their respective boards to the Federation Board, and agairi it will be noted that one of the members from each of the member libraries must be a person from one of the municipal councils concerned, thus maintaining that working relationship which is part and parcel of the present Public Libraries Act. The work of the federation would be financed by contributions that would be made to the federation by the member libraries in accordance with the terms of their agreement, and that will be their own decision in that regard.

It will be noted that -- and one of the important things to remember is that the individual member libraries continue their separate corporate existence and there is no interference in any way with them in that regard. The bill of course contains the necessary provisions for the management of the work of the federation. Madam Speaker, we believe we present this as an important extensioh of our library services.

We are hopeful that it will meet the wishes of this House and also that it will meet the approval of a number of the libraries in the province who will see fit to join a federation under the arrangements set out in this bill, because we are confident that it offers a useful means of strengthening and expanding the work of library services generally throughout the province and also of the individual member libraries because of the expanded services they will be able to provide their own people; and it is on that basis that I recommend the measure to the House. MR. J. M.

FROESE (Rhineland): Madam Speaker, just a few comments on the bill. I think it's a good one. I think it will have a great value in the future as we go along. Just last year two local libraries were established in our area. There was one at WiD.kler and one at Morden, and I can see where this federation can be of great value by the interchange of books; That will mean that less books will have to be purchased - or not duplication of the same books - so that in that respect it will be of great value as I see it.

I also noted that there is no number of local libraries required in order to form a federation, so that this is left up to the individual member libraries. Just one question, under 33 (e), it says "furnish books. " I should like to get a definition from the Minister what he means by furnishing. Will the federation be able to order any books of its own or is that completely left to the member libraries to order these? I think we•ve had a good example through our film councils that form a federation of this type and we •re able to I I � I I I I

March 14, 1966 903 (MR. FROESE cont 'd. ) ..... exchange films which are being shown at the various schools in our area and in this way could be interchanged, so likewise they will be able to interchange books at the local level. I think this bill is a commendable one and should have a good future. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. McLEAN presented Bill No. 41,

an Act to amend The Election Act, for second reading. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. McLEAN: Madam Speaker, I do not antici pat e the same reception for this bill as for the last. As members will recall, the Committee on Privileges and Elections that was appointed at the first session in 1964 and reconfirmed or reappointed at the summer session of .1964, met during the year 1964 and early 19 65, and the report of the committee was pre sented to the Legislature on February 23, 1965 and reported in Votes and Proceedings of that date.

The bill, subject to two matters, the bill which is presently before the members follows that report. Now inasmuch as the report has been before the members since -- it was brought before the members on the 23rd of February last year and contained a large number of individual items, I shall not spend much time speaking about the bill except to try and illustrate some of the things which this bill in principle and policy endeavours to provide.

I think that it would be fair to say that in many matters the report and the bill is designed to bring The Manitoba Elections Act more in line with the provisions of the Federal Elections Act and there will be a number of instances that members will observe where this is the case, not to say that the provisions are identical in all respects but a number of the proposals have the effect of bringing our own Elections Act into line with the provisions of the Federal Elections Act.

There are a number of what might be called I suppose technical improvements and clari fications, wording - perhaps somewhat better grammar in ope or two instances - and I give an illustration. For example, the provision of a form for the acknowledgment of. nomination papers, which is.a technical item, is provided for. There is a good deal of simplification and improvement, both of documents and forms, and members in this: connection will note for example a more simplified proclamation and a different form of ballot, the ballot following the form which is presently in use under the Federal Elections Act.

There have been removed a number of provisions which the committee considered were unnecessary. For example, the obligation which presently exists that people have to act as Returning Officers according to the terms of the Act, presumably whether they wish to or not. Well, the committee felt that that was an unnecessary provision and so the bill proposes that it be removed.

I would think that the principal matters, the most substance of matters in the bill have to do with the improvements with the provisions which will result illt improvement respecting enum eration, and voters 1 lists and voting, and there are a number of measures all related to this general aspect, all designed to ensure better enumeration, bette][' voters 1 lists, and provisions which more easily provide for voting on election day or at the advance polls which precede election day.

The provisions of the bill are, in effect, the results of the consideration given by the members of the committee, all of whom have had considerable experience in political affairs and in elections, to that general proposition. I of course would not present any of the changes in this general sphere as being a final answer. I suppose one could guarantee that somebody's name will be left off the voters' list or that errors of that sort w:lll exist even under changes that are made here, and there will be other improvements of that nature no doubt made in the years that lie ahead.

But in any event, there are a number of sections all designed for this purpose. I should direct members' attention to two matters, one which is a matter that was men tioned in the report and one which is a matter which is not mentioned in the report. In the re port there was a recommendation by the committee that the voti lllg hours be altered from eight to -- that polls be open on election day from 8: 00 a. m. to 9: 00 p. m. , and members will note that there is no proposal in this bill with that respect.

As I alerted the members when pre senting the report, that was an item on which perhaps there was some doubt with respect to legislation, and I can just say quite frankly that it was not considered advisable to propose any change in the voting hours, but I do direct the attention of the members to the fact that in that respect the legislation does not conform with the report that was presented to the House. One other matter is in the legislation, and that is with respect to the provision of liquor after the close of polls on election day. This is an item, Madam Speaker, which was discussed

904 March 14, 1966 (MR. McLEAN cont•d. ) ...... by the committee briefly, although no recommendation was made. This provision is in the bill respecting The Election Act and is a companion measure to a measure which we shall be presenting to the House for their consideration in respect. of The Liquor Act itself, and if the provision in The Liquor Act were to receive favourable approval, it requires this companion provision in The Elections Act. It is there for that purpose and briefly is to allow the operation of the normal liquor licenses and/or permits after the close of the polls on election day.

These are the two matters as I say in which, in a sense, the bill somewhat departs from the provisions of the report of the committee. Madam Speaker, I believe that this bill is designed to improve the election machinery in the Province of Manitoba and I recommend it to the House. MR. MOLGAT : Madam Speaker, I do not rise to oppose the bill because I intend to sup port its going to the committee stage. We may have some further observations to make on specific sections at that time and some amendments to move. In general, we agreed with a good deal of the work that the committee did last year.

We put forward some other suggestions that the committee did not accept and I'm sorry that that is the case. We approached the committee's work last year with two general principles. One, that wherever possible, the provincial legislation on elections should be similar to the federal legislation, and wherever possible as well, the municipal should follow the same course.

It is our feeling that there is a good deal of confusion in the minds of the public with regards to hours at which the polls open, hours at which they close, regulations on such things as advanced polls, who may vote and who may not vote, and that this standardization of our acts at every level would facilitate the second principle which concerned us, and that was to encourage the largest number possible to vote. We felt that simplification of the Act and standardization of the Act would achieve in many respects that second objective, that is encouraging the number who vote.

It is indeed pathetic when you think of the battles that went on in past day s to get the right to vote and run our own affairs, and then you look at the numbers who turn out to vote in present day elections. There were a number of matters which we felt should have been added to the report of the committee which would have improved in particular the making up of the list of electors itself. It has been my experience that if there are difficulties with the list, the list is not complete and accurate, that this discourages many people from coming to vote on election day.

It was for this reason that we recommended last year that there should be two enumerators used in the urban voting division under the provincial Act in the same way as is done under the federal Act. The reason for that, Madam Speaker, is because with one enumerator only, which is the present practice, chosen normally by the party in power, that one enumerator can easily - and I• m saying this quite sincerely - not by any deliberate attempt at all but by pure accident - because it's one person working - could quite easily .miss a street or miss a side of a street, or miss an apartment block.

This was the case in 1962 when in certain of the city ridings complete apartment blocks had been missed by the enumerator.

Well if there were two enum erators, which is the practice under the federal Act, one named by the party in power or the candidate - or I should say the member from the constituency - the party represented by that member and the other named by the other party who came second in·the last election, I think this sets up the situation where there is a genuine attempt, because there •s a dual party repre sentation of making sure that everyone gets on the voters' list, and this is I think the place in which we must begin, that every name who is entitled to vote definitely gets on the list.

So these are the sort of suggestions that we made in the committee last year, Madam Speaker, and a number of these were not accepted by the government, which I regret, because it is most important in my mind to facilitate in every way that we can, consistent with having proper elections, to facilitate voting by people.

In addition of course there was some other factors of a different nature that we brought up and which we will be discussing later on during the session by way of other resolutions, and I'm referring to voting at age 18, which we felt should have been part of the committee's re port but which was refused at that time and it is not part of the amendment now. We are bringing it in by way of resolution. But all in all, Madam Speaker, I believe that the Act repre sents a forward step in improving our Act and improving the techniques by which we are going to make up our lists.

I think we could go further but we are prepared to accept what there is here for the time being and let it go to committee. I' m a little perplexed by

Section 98 of the Act and I hope you 1ll excuse me while I select I I � •

March 14, 1966 905 (MR. MOLGAT cont'd. ) .•.•. one section, Madam Speaker - I realize that I should be dealing with the Act in general principles but I think that this does come down to the principles - be cause that

section says that with the exception of

Section 58 - and that

section will be on a day fixed by proClamation - that one section, on a day fixed by proclamation, but the remainder of the Act comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent. Now why is there a division between these sections of the Act.

Section 58 of the Act I take it is the one that the Minister referred to which establishes the question of liq uor outlets being open on that day. It would seem to me, and this is by very casual reading, that the balance of this Act may not be put into effect for some time. Now does that mean that the next election which has been heralded for the fairly near future according to my honourable friends at their meeting last week, does this mean that this Act will not be applicable to that great event which I look forward to, or does it mean only that one

section will be applicable at that time. I1 d be interested to hear from the Minister exactly what the intentions are in this regard. MR. S. PETERS (El mwood): Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, that the debate be adjourned -- adjourned unless the Honourable Member from Rhine land wishes to ·speak. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAKER: The second reading of Bill No. 50. The Honourabie the Minister for Agriculture and Con servation. MR. EV ANS: Madam Speaker, I request the indulgence of the House to allow this item to stand. MR. BAIZLEY presented Bill No. 53,

an Act to amend the Labour Relations Act (1), for second reading. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. BAIZLEY: Madam Speaker, there are three important changes proposed by the amendments to this bill. Firstly, we are introducing a new method of dealing with cases where it is alleged that either an employer or the union has interfered with the right of a worker to join an orga niza tion of his choice, and under the amendment the Manitoba Labour Board will be authorized to hear such complaints, to issue cease and desist or ders, and to order reinstate ment of the employee in his employment. Secondly, we•ve come along to a much maligned sub section (3) of

Section 21, which is the strike vote being conducted by the Manitoba Labour Board. We would ask you to support the repealing of that and we are making provisions that the st:-ike vote shall be by secret ballot. The third important change is that we are attempting to encour age the parties to select mediators -- where the parties will agree to a mediator, the cost of the media tion will be paid for out of public funds, and we feel that this is a help in labour management relations. Now there are a couple of other minor changes which are for clarification.

One is arbi tration procedures for the settlement of disputes arising out of collective agreements and these are continued in effect during the period when an agreement has expired and a new agreement has not been concluded, or until a point in negotiations where the parties have the right to strike or to walk out legally. Another change is prohibited acts by unions and employers. This is clarified and it also gives the employers the right to freely express their views arid particularly their views about unio ri organization at the time that unions are in the process of organi zing - freedom of speech.

Madam Speaker, I would commend these amendments of The Labour Relations Act to the members of the House. MR. PATRICK: Madam Speaker, I wish to advise the merr1bers of the House that we will be supporting the bill but I do wish at this time to advise the Minister that I will be proposing an amendment in respect to the secret strike vote.

I know the Minister has gone half-way what the Woods Committee recommended, but he did not go all the way� I• m glad to see that the government is following the Woods Committee recommendations on unfair labour practices; and, Madam Speaker, these are the very recommendations which we proposed to this House last year, because if you refer to Hansard, Page 14 32, this is what we said the government should be doing in respect to The Labour Rela ti ons Act, which now becomes a prohibited act.

We did say that "Jurisdiction over enforcement of Labour Relations Act should be placed under the Labour Relations Boa rd" -- I'm quoting from Hansard, Page 14 32, Madam Speaker -- 11 The Labour Board to set up a procedure similar to that of Ontario where upon receipt of a

906 March 14, 1966 (MR. PATRICK cont'd.) ..... complaint under The Labour Relations Act, it immediately sends officers to investigate, to attempt to resolve any dispute . This provision is especially significant in relation to allegations of unfair labour practices.

(3) If the complaint Is not re solved, the Labour Board to hold hearings and to make a determination, the Board to have the power to make a ce ase arid desist order to reinstate an employee and order. compens ation for loss of earnings. " We said, 11 These provisions are in line with what already is in force in many of the other provinces in Ontario, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan, 11 and I said I hoped our Honourable Minister yvould give some consideration to these points . That was part of our reso lution as far as certification procedures were concerned. I believe this is good legislation.

The key to these provisions is the idea that unfair labour practices be dealt with and if poss ible be resolved by a .field officer, the Labour Relations Board only interfering only where it is necess ary. I also said last year that officers should be of highest calibre and should have training, and at that time we also recomm ended that the government maybe set up an industrial relations department at the university or the Institute of Technology to. train people for this type of work.

I would like to refer at this time to the Woods Comm ittee on Page 6, and that•s Appendix C, "Joint Recomm endations on Unfair Labour Practices, 11 and I would like to just read a few sentences out of it. It says, "Legis lation similar to that examined in Ontario is also in effect in British Columbia, Quebec, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia. Sufficient time has not been avail able to examine the results in these provinces ; but experience in Ontario seems to reflect favourably on these procedures .

It is true that approximately 15 0 cases a year on the average are filed with the Ontario Board, and it is not unreasonable to assume that Manitoba will not have more than 20 or so cases to be filed. 11 Well, this is the point where I would like to disagree to the Minister. I would at least like to make a. recommendation because, in my opinion, I feel there will be more cases in Manitoba largely because employers do not fully recognize the need of trade unions in Manitoba and the se cond point is because many of our shops are quite small.

The reason I make this point, I feel that the government maybe should be giving some considera tion to strengthening our Board, perhaps maybe making three of the members on it permanent as a permanent staff, so that they•ll be able to be more full-time and to deal on it and be on the job at all times. That's one of the points that this bill deals with, this Labour Relations Act. The seco nd point that I would like to make some remarks about is the secr et strike vote.

We did have a resolution on this for the last two or three years and at that time we did say that the se cret strike vote was not necessary; it was insulting to the trade unions and it should have been repealed . Now the Woods Comm ittee , if we turn to Page 4 in that section, the Woods Committee - it says right in the book, a new

section - "A strike vote taken by a trade union shall be by ballots cast in such a manner that a person express ing his choice cannot be identified with the choice expressed. 11 Notice the two most important ingredients in this section, Firstly, it says, "taken by a union"; and the second point, "sec ret". This is what the Woods Comm ittee recommended. What is in the Bill?

In the Bill there •s no mention - it says, 11 Every strike vote taken shall be by written ballots cast in such manner that the person voting cannot be identified with the ballot he cast. 1 1 It doesn •t say how this strike is supposed to be taken, by whom, where, by Government or Union. There 's no reference in this bill as to who is going to take the strike vote, which is not the same as the Woods Committee recomm ended. There •s another

section that I would like to also point out. It •s point 4, which concerns me and I think this is the biggest thing that I think this bill is going to give us problems, and that is the voting constituency in every strike vote is the bargaining unit represented by the bargaining agent. We all know that in most collective agreements there is no "closed shop . 1 1 This means that not all of the employees in a plant or shop are union people.

Now picture the situation where a union bargaining on behalf of employees, with the employer looking only to its membership for guidance, reaches a point where it wants a formal opinion.on whether to hold a strike or not. The union executive wants formal authority to call a strike. The executive decides to strike, that the strike is advisable . Ordinarily you would expect only the union members to vote on this issue, but

Section 21 (4) makes the voting consti tuency of all employees in the shop or plant whether they are union members or not. I think this is going to cause quite a problem, because picture the vote being taken by a union, no doubt in a union hall or in a labour centre, can you see non-union men coming in to vote? If they do come, you can feel the atmosphere. Any experienced labour man will tell you that you are inviting trouble, and personally I don 't think it is going to work. So I' m going to propose an I - • I I

March 14, 1966 90 7 (MR. PATRICK cont 'd) .... amendment to this

section that it shou ld be the union taking the strike vote and it should be the union members alone. But I would like to quote from - which I think is really expressed quite well by Dudley Magnus, whom I personally feel is probably one of the most expert la bour reporters in Manitoba, and this is what he had to say on the recent

article in the Woods Committee suggestions -- and this is what he had to say and I think he makes a good point. "If amendments are passed as is through the House this Session that there will not be a union vote in Manitoba but as at present an employee vote, the great difference of co urse will be that the union will conduct an employee vote where and when it pleases, not the government. There may be some difficulties here because the non-union worker, a likely •nay • in the strike vote, won't be too welcome at a strike vote meeting of the union members in the Labour Temple or Union Centre.

Furthermore, the average non-union men or women will not be over-anx ious to attend a union meeting. Union meetings are often held with a warden at the door who first wants to know who it is who enters. 11 I 1 m not in a union, but I have come to vote 11 , might be received with mixed feelings by many union members and this is going to cause trouble. " Now he goes further to say, 11 I asked R. J. Bud Henderson, President of the Manitoba Federation of Labour and a member of the Woods Committee about the situation. He said he didn't like it at all, that the idea was to do away with the present section.

This is a step forward, and we propose now to go further for improvement. 1 1 And I think he makes a really good point. Madam Speaker, this brings another point to my mind. I' m glad that the government has followed some of the recommendations of the Woods Committee, but we have been making these recommendations to this House for many years. What about the points that the Woods Committee and the management and labour do not agree on? I wonder if this government is going to show any leadership in this point and take any action.

It's easy to say, well we•ll fill this out to the labour management and let him study it and bring recommendations, we'r e going to do what they say, but there's many areas where I am sure they do not agree on. This government shou ld show some action on what their policies are. We did.

At least our group has said what we felt about the strike vote, what we should do in certification matters, and I am glad to see that the government has taken our recommendations into consideration, but I do serve notice that I will be making an amendment on the point that I mentioned, where the strike vote to be taken should be taken by unions. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR. PETERS: I would like to move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Logan, that the debate be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried.

MADAM SPEAKER: The second reading of Bill No. 57. The Honourable the Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR. EV ANS: Madam Speaker, could we have the indulgence of the House to allow this to stand. . . . . . . . continued on next page

908 March 14, 1966 MR. EV ANS: Madam Speaker, I beg· to move, seconded by the Honourable Minister of Education, that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car ried, and the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply with the Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre in the Chair. ·M R. EV ANS: The Honourable Member for Hamiota, Mad!llll Speaker, will take the Chair. MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Hamiota. COMMI TTEE OF SUPP LY MR . CHAIRMAN: Item 1 (

a) Passed -- MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I think the Minister of Education had some other replies we were waiting for before we leave the salaries. It seems to me ..... MR. JOHNSON : I think I gave a rather complete reply to the honourable member concern ing the extent of the French and Francais upon introduction to the system.

I think one of the other questions he asked was "Are prlvate schools as good as public schools?" As you know, a child must either be in attendance at a public school or otherwise eurolled in, under the School Attendance Act, a private school, and the inspection really - the departments involvement is simply to the extent as to whether or no they give the equivalent in education or a minimum stand ard of education as compared with the public schools. The information I received from the de partment is many are very excellent, others much like many public schools, vary.

I imagine it's the staff and -- I am sure there are certain public schools that wouldn't measure up to cer tain private, and vice versa. But generally, it is felt they give a satisfactory standard of education. The reference to the appeal against - refusal of a Board to agree with flllOther Board for instruction. As you know the individual school boards can determine within .their own areas those courses which they will offer in their schools, and I believe they are looking at certain amendments of the Act re inter-divisional and inter-district co-operation or sharing of services, etcetera.

But this again is something which -- in their own jurisdiction local boards are the authority within their district as to those matters. There are certain amendments coming forward with respect to, for example with the introduction of regional vocational high schools where several divisions and districts would have to share one vocational centre, because we would have to have enough students from -- it would take about 3 to 5 divisions in order to produce or to fill a 500 classroom count vocation al centre, so further amendments re inter-divisional matters will be coming before us in the legislation.

I was trying to recall further questions the Member from St. Boniface asked. If he would jolt my memory when I sit down I would be happy to try and answer further. I tried to look over most of the questions and generally, I think I referred to a good many of them. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the Minister for the added information, answers that he just finished giving us. He had mentioned something about tele vision and I had agreed that there was an awful lot that had been done in television, but I made a comment or suggestion that we should look immediately in the proposal that aT .

V. station for the field of education should be started, be promoted at the University grounds, and the Minister didn't see fit to comment on that, but that will be fine. I still think that this is some thing that should be done. Now I'm not too satisfied with the answer that I just received re the appeal to the Minister. I know what's gOing on now. This is why I mention it. I think that in this case the people should have an appeal.

There's been a few cases where people were not satisfied with what was done by the Local School Board, and as this is only permissive legislation, as we understand, it seems to me that in certain cases, we are going to have this equality of opportunity for all, I think that in certain cases - I'm not suggesting that things should be done automatically, I'm just suggesting that the Government should, if they're responsible for the administration of education, and certainly this is the case, I think that the Government should have a final say. We should be able to lodge an appeal with the Minister, and this is what I was suggesting.

Of course the Government is free to accept this or reject it. There's something -- a note that I had taken when the Minister was talking about television. I think he said that the Province which had more to say would get the grease. I think he meant by that, that whoever had a little • I I

March 14 , 1966 90 9 (MR . DESJAR DINS cont'd) ..... more pull. I think that in this case -- and I'm not blaming him for this , because he has done an awful lot in this field since he's there,but the former Minister didn't ask for any grease at all. I think that the main thing - that whoever got in line first, be cause it's either Nova Scotia or New Brunswick that received value over $1 million dollars be fore any other provinces took advantage of this . This is quite a while ago that W3' had suggested that. But this is water under the bridge anyway.

There is something that I feel that's very important, and I would like, this is something that can't be done from one day to the other, and I don't expect -- or in a question of days I should say , -- I don't expect the Minister to give me any commitment at this time, but I would like him to take this under advisement and think of this very seriously. A few weeks ago under the Estimates of the Attorney-General, I made a few comments, few remarks, about lawyers and so on, and I did say at the time that a lot of the things that could be remedied could be done if the people knew a little more about things.

Well, at the present time we have courses on pretty well everything and we're talking about ot hers on training the students in certain places to drive, which is very good. Certain places -- oh, there's all kinds of things, certain things that are used to develop the mind and so on of the students, certain things that they might not use too much in a way, but still it seems these courses are good. I would like the Ministe r to think very seriously of introducing another course and this could be done.

I think that if we showed the lead in this, I think that in no time the people all across Canada -- if it's not done. I don't think it is done anywhere -- would follow our lead. Now, I think that sometimes somewhere 'there should be a course where the people will know just the fundamentals of how to manage their homes. What I mea.lll by that is what happens in ordinary life that the ordinary people don't know a thing about. Some course that will have to oo with the common thing in law for instance . How many people know what a mortgage is , or the different types of insurances; or a bond or an option.

I think that this would be very im portant, that we should have a course -- I don't know exactly the administrators -- the educa tors could tell you this -- but I would like the people that know more about it than I do to study this very seriously, and when a young person gets -- and preferal:1ly in one of the -- not wait till they're in university and so on, cause a lot of people don't go lto university, don't attend university. But I think that most of the young people getting married should know all about a mortgage, should know all about a bond, should know all about leases.

Be lieve me there's an awful lot of people that don't know about that -- and some of us here in this House I am sure. If we knew a little bit more about that, and if we knew our rights and if we knew what to expect from the law I think it would be very interesting. I've di scussed this after my remarks w you can we 11 understand - I received a few remarks from other peopLe also - and I've discussed this with a lot of lawyers and it seems that after awhile I'd lose them or they'd lose me because their inte lligence is, at least in this respect, is above the ordinary people.

They're trained in this business of law and automatically they think they know the answer, but the ordinary people don't know these things, and I think it would be a very good thing ii we would have a course. I don't care if it's one period a week, it wouldn't be wasted, where we can discuss inSurances, the type of insurances, because every single person should have that -- a bit of the income tax, the tax structures in our country, and - well as I said, the mortgage or the payments , whatever you do, what to expect from a lawyer.

I think the Minister knows what I mean, and I would like him to think about this andma)�]:\e next year, I hope, come in with a recommenda tion. Now there's another point, Mr. Chairman, that I'm not going to be too long on. It's this question that I brought in about this teaching of French. I was hoping that the Minister would make some statement because once we leave these estimates we won't come back on this, not for this year. It seems we do this every year.

It's true that the Leader of the NDP has asked for some questions on this Wi ndsor Park affair, but these are only questions and the only chance -we'll have would be to ask questions before the Orders of the Day. I would like to -- vrell, first of all, I would like to know, I would like the government to be able to let the public in on this . Did the St. Boniface School Board break the law or did they stay within the law, in all this episode? Because you don't just close your eyes now. Ther·e•s been a lot of things said, there' s been a lot of adverse publicity, and I would like to know if this is the case.

Now, I would like to remind you - as I said before that things like this vre shouldn't play too much politics on this . I think that vre started this whole thing wrong in 1963 , and I would like to go back a little bit. In 1963 in this House I suggested this following resolution, Mr. Chairman, and I quote, from Page 305 of March 15, 1963 , three years ago tomorrow, and the I I I

910 . March 14 , 1966 (MR .. DESJAaDINS cont'd) ... . motion was this: "I wish to move , seconded by the Honourable Member from Carillon, that

whereas Canada is a bilingual country, the true extent of which has not been adequately recognized in the past, and

whereas Canada will be qe lebrating its Centenary in July of 1967 and every effort should be made to recapture. the spirit and basic conc�pt of our confederacy, and the best method of so doing would be by promoting and en couraging bilingualism in this province; and

whereas provision has been made in our Public Schools Act for the optional teaching of French starting from Grade 4; and

whereas psycho logists maintain that the best time to teach a child any language is up to the age of ten years; therefore be it reso lve�d that provision be made in our Public Schools Act for the optional teaching of French from Gr ade l". Well, Mr. Chairman, this wasn't too controversial I thought and as I said at the time I certainly was not advocating that French should be forced on anybody, but I felt that at least we should make the teaching of French availab le here in a bilingual country for those who were interested in it, and I felt that the number was ever growing.

This is some of the things I said at the time, and I said "Today in French I praised the First Minister, " and I'm quodng now from the speech of that date, "for his interest in the French language; for his willingness to speak French; for his lack of prejudice. I have congratulated him for being perfectly bilingual. I meant it and I have not had a change of heart since." This was in 1963. "This man has probably done more for our cause by his example than most of us here .

This I recognize, but because of his statement and because of the timing of his statement, I must explain the I reason for me bringing this motion. I must assure you Madam that I am more interested in • the result than in the credit here . I do not deny that the Honour able the First Minister has always been in favour of the principle spelled out in this motion, and I must also admit that allthe members of the Liberal caucus were in. accord with me when I pre sented this motion"-- and this is a point that I wanted to bring out. "In fact I haven't heard a single mem ber of this House object to it.

Of course I haven't been speaking to all of them. I would not like to see us argue childishly to see who deserves credit here . I don't think that this is a motion where we should indulge in this kind of debate but rather we should demonstrate a good example to the rest of the people of Manitoba by presenting a solid front. The four party leaders in the federal campaign recognized the value of bilingualism to our country. The Honourable First Minister indicated many tiines that he does. Mr. Campbell did the same thing when he insti tuted the optional French from Grade 4 and saying this was just the first step.

Yes, all of us are in favour ! am sure , but the fact is that at the present optional teaching of French from Grade 1 is not allowed and this motion would rectify this wrong. " Well, if you remembe r, Mr. Chairman, after this is something that--oh, I remember after. that there was a speech from the Member from Brokenhead at the time, Mr.

Schreyer, and he certainly favoured everything that was said, no partisan politics in here, and he finished by saying, therefore -there had been an amendment by the Honourable Member from Rhine- land who withdrew it later on, and this is what he referred to, but he said: "Therefore I" - and this is Hansard, Page 805 the. same year --"I suggest that we pass the reso lution in the form that the Member for St. Boniface has proposed it, I could not bring myself to vote against the amendment if I thought that as re sult of that the entire thing would be defeated.

So I suppose we shall support it if there is no other alternative, but I simply point out that we would be much happier with the original motion. " He was speaking for his Party again.

Well, to our surprise the--as I said the other night, there was an amendment brought in by the Honourable Member from Rupertsland, and he started by saying that "I should like to compliment the honourable member on the broadminded and non-partisan way in which he approached the very important subject of teaching of French in the schools of Manitoba, which I was very flattered; but then he says : "The desire of the Honourable Member of St. Boniface to get things started is fully appreciated and I be lieve under stood.

It would however, not be proper for the Department of Education or School Boards to announce their intention before plans to operate the change are completed." And then what I ref erred to as a wishy-washy amendment, and I'm not going to read all the "Whereases" because it's the usual thing, but the important thing in the motion was "Now therefore

be it resolved that this House approves the action taken by the Minister of Education and recomm ends that the Department of Education continue, in co-operation with the Advisory Board, consideration of extending the teaching of French in the Manitoba school system. " Well, do we realize what this means, or what this meant? There were three parties anyway that were ready to go ahead with optional teaching of French from Grade 1. This had

March 14 , 1966 91 1 (MR. DESJARDINS conf;'d) .... been done gradually from Grade 9 and Grade 4 and so on -- it was Grade 1. And then at the time, I think that the government was \vrong -- again it was the former Minister of Educ ation -- I think it was wrong, because all this motion did - and nobody was going to be stuck with this, there wasn't going to be any polities, because two parties were absolutely in favour of this. Now this was asking the members of this House to approve something. It was something that would be inc luded in the Act, the Public Schools Act, the optional teaching of French from Grade 1.

Well, for some reaso n or other, the governm ent at the time did .n ot see fit to accept this responsibility. This is what I said then and this is what I repeat. So it brought all this - swung all the respons ibility on the shoulders of an Advisory Board. Well., let's see what happened then. Well it was obvious that some thing would come in, I thought, and I wasn't disappointe d in this fact although what came in did not please me . It was on ;ruly 4th that -- I have here from the Tribune that: "Fran :rais now optional from Grade 1 ." It was the Adv isory Board.

And right on the first line it was, "Be ginning in Grade 1 for those whose mother tongue is French •1. that was the key thing. Now the government brought this in. This was an announc ement by the then Minister of Education who is now the Attorney-General, spe aking in Brandon , and this is what he did -- there's quite a bit of the declaration here, but I can read the thing that I'm mostly interest ed in.

It says that, "In conformity with the reso lution of the Advisory Board the govern ment is now embarking upon a new program in the teaching of French for the pupil whose mother tongue is French; the ne w course to be knows as Francais has been approved and will commence in Septemrer 1963. " -' You see this is the point. I'm not sugges ting that the government wanted trouble at the time, or ·an ything like that. I think that they meant well, but it was a mistake that was recog nized at the time. It was a mis take and in the Tribune of the next day they had differe nt com ments. Mr.

AndrewRobertsnn, Chairman of the Winn ipeg School Board praised the new course as long overdue and promised to fight to make it available to all students -b ut not just to those with French descent. And the same thing, Emerson Arnett the gE�neral sec retary of the Manitoba Teachers saiid: "I regret that the course will be limited to students of French des cent, " he said. "I don 't see the reaso ning in that at all. I can't see why it should just be st arted in Grade 1 this Fall. " Well, when I sa w this in the newspa per, Mr.

Chairman, the government had done some thing, something recoJp:�mended supposedl y by an Advisory Board. Well, I can un derstand an Advisory Board bringing in certain administration problems and c:ertain things like this . We're not expert on that. But the principl e , the principle -- I had asked in 1963 that we recognize the principle, and this was our responsibi lity here in this House , nobody else. This was our res ponsi bility. This wasn't done . So in July of that same year this is what we were faced with. Well, Mr.

Chairman, just to indicate that what I sa id last Friday was not politics or anything like that, I'll read a letter that I wrote to the Premier on the date of July 16, 1963, immediately when this anno uncement had been made by the then Minister of Ec1ucation. "Dear Mr. Roblin: Since 1959 when I was first el ected as a represen tative for St. Boniface to the provinc ial legisla ture, I have many opportunities to hear you enunciate your views on bilingualism and biculturalism in Canada and in particularly in Manitoba.

During the last Sess ion I was dis appoiinted whea the government saw fit to amend my motion, a motion that if passed, would have recognized the principle of bilingualism and also one which would have provided the law makE�rs of this province with an opportunity to show leadership and recognize the principle of the two official language s of our country in the true spirit of conf eder ation.

The amendme nt brought in by a government member left the responsibi lity of acting on the principle with the advisory board, for there was no doubt in mind at the time that before the next full term your government would legalize the teaching of French in Grade 1. The state ment made by the Honourable Minister of Education on July 4, 1963 surprised and disappointe d me for the following reasons : (1 ) French can now legally be taught in Grade 1 onl y to students whose mother tongue is French - no provision is made for non-French students who want to learn French.

(2) No mention was made of improved teacher training to develop qualified French teachers .

(3) The de lay in legalizing French teaching in Grade 2 and 3 is unn eces sary .

(4) No steps are being taken to make French a teaching language . In view of the great impor tance of the question, Mr. Premier, I wish to present the follow:lng recommendations for your consideration:

(1) The immediate official recognization of the principle of optional teaching of French to all Manitobans in all Grades. This would leave each individual School Board free to make its own decision. In order to make this first recommendation possible , the governm ent

91 2 March 14, 1966 (MR. DESJARDINS cont'd) .•• should immediately take the necessary steps to train qualified French teachers.

(2) May I bright to your attention the fact that the St. Boniface College would be in a good position to carry out this program for the Manitoba Teachers College or as part of the Manitoba Teachers College. This could be done without complication since the St. Boniface College is already affiliated with the University of Manitoba.

(3) In view of the fact that, at the present, the Department of Education stated that it is not in a position to offer further French courses to those whose mother tongue is not French and also because a special program is being prepared for the French speaking student, it would be a good occasion, a very big step forward if the government were to declare French a teaching language for certain sub j ects such as History and Geography. This of course, for the time being, would be re stricted to children whose mother tongue is French, and would be optional.

I've taken the liber ty of forwarding this recommendation to you because I feel that the subject is of such great importance and should not suffer because of partisan politics. " This is what has transpired, Mr. Chairman, starting with this reso lution. Its the first one that I heard dealing with the French language since my election to the House in 1959 . I think it was a mistake then, and I think that the government should recognize this. It's not a question that I want to crow. This is not the thing at all. Or play politics.

I think that maybe the government meant well - the then Minister of Education meant well. But we can see that this has not worked. It has not worked because the people of Manitoba don't like the idea of a course just offered to a certain group. Now, I will say -- I'm not certainly, as I said I'm not going to play politics and try to stay on both sides of this business. I think that the word segregation has got an awful lot of mileage in this province.

When I say that I favour some of the - that I'm concerned about some of the points brought out by the Citizens Committee, I feel that they should not - those that meant it, those that were sincere - that they should have a chance, an occasion to learn French also, that everybody - it shouldn't be just a certain group. I agree with this. If these people are sincere. Now, as I say, segre gation -- you can. push these things too far. If you want to forget about all --I say it is impos sible not to segregate at all.

And if you're going to bring segregation, this is just a way then, all right the majority will rule, absolutely. And this is the best -- this is the only way. You could have no rights for minorities of any kind, if this is the case. Now, you have segregation, this might be far fetched, but you have segregation now in University. You have the students studying law on one side and medical students on aoother side. Well this is all right. You have segregation of worship, or you have no Uberty of worship log. You have certain segregation.

The point - I think its bad to earmark only a group can do this, but if a group wants to take advantage of some liberty of some right, to worship for in- I' stance or to study law or to study French, or to study something else, I don't believe that this is discrimination. And I don't think that the government -- I will say this in all sincerity. I'm sure that the government did not intend to segregate these people at the time - the students. But I think that the government was wrong because it did not approve the principle here in this House.

I think that the government was wrong although they were advised at the time that we needed French teachers. The government did very very little to do anything about it. What I say now and what I said in '63 is still the thing to do - to try and get the Minister to give me some figures. There is some retraining, but I don't think that is enough and this is one of the reasons why I'm so interested in the TV -- the use of television in education.

I think that if I we're going to have that and if we're going to have -- I don't believe that French should be forced down anybody's throat, I'll repeat this again, -- but I think we should have the teachers - qualified teachers, and we'll have to develop them. We're not doing enough in this field and we started too late and I think that the only way - then we'll be able to offer it to those that want it. I think this is the word - I agree if we talk about segregation that only a certain group of people can have this. That I believe is the kind of segregation we don't want.

Now it will take a while before we qualify this -- but these things won't be done from one day to the other. I have another Bill in front of the House and I had it last year and it is a pretty well a compa nion bill. Last year when I brought in this Bill, I felt that, in my innocence I guess, that there wouldn't be anything wrong, politically it wasn't going to hurt anybody to at least approve the second readingof thisbill. I couldn't see whatel se we could do; wecould vote foror against aprinciple in second reading. I could understand in committee the governmentco mingin andsay, well, we'l l make a start.

But the principle would be approved; the principle of really bilingualism, of getting a chance. Then of course ir might take ten years to come into effect because you have to - you can't do it in a - it's -got to be done in an ordinary way. And it's possible the government said

March 14, 1966 91 3 (MR. DESJARDINS cont'd) .. all righ t this is fine we approve the principle and then this would be behind - we wouldn 't spend all the time fi ghting on these things and we wou ldn •t get all this adve rse publicity. The government might say all rig ht we can •t do anything el se we 're going to start now maybe on soc ial studi es. This is what I want with this bill. This is not to embarrass anybody . Neither in '63 , neither in 165 or neither this year.

I just want us to show -- to give leadership and to show a little bit of the class of the people that we should have here in Mani toba and to show that we're sincere; that we don't just read the paper and talk about separatism and that we are going to be t he biggest separatists of them all. That we are looking not only as Manitobans but we are acting as Canadians.

And this was recogni zed; and this is one of the reasons why I'm shocked when I see some of the members of the c:abinet , and esp eciall y the First Minister, who make these flowing speeches, these wonderfu l speec hes so mewhere else and will not take the responsibility that he has right in this province or in this House -, to enter the debate . As I sa id, maybe these things are a little difficult, but we've got to face them. So my purpose today is not to embarrass anybody, I think that we have to look at the mistakes we've made , And I'm not accusi ng the government.

I'm accusi ng the government in 163 of not having done anything ·about it because it was brought in by somebody else , - that I'm accus ing. But the government must remembe r, and I'v e quoted this many time s and I'm re ady to do it again, that in 1958, ' star ting in 1958, the First Minister said , after the nmrt election. Well that was in 159, but he had spoke in '58 that he wanted to see the day when every si ngle person in Manitoba would speak French and English.

And he sa id that in '59, shortly before the - and in 162 again that we would have French teaching in - and it was only in '63 that I brought in the first resolu tion and I tried to bring it in in a most non-partisan way that I knew how to do. This is all I'm doing again this year. I'm re ady - and I think we should forge t all this . I think that the Minister of Education -- the only reason why I brought in this today -- I mentione d a few things on Fr iday and I thought that the Minister would make some sta tement. And he has to make some sta tement.

We can't let the esti mate s of this department go by and all these things without any sta teme nt. I think the people of Manitoba are entitled to know if the School Board of Winnipeg have been acting in good faith - of St. Boniface I should say. They didn't say -i t wasn't their ide a to say that teaching of Fran �ais is only for those whose mother tongue is Fre nch. It wasn't those people at all.

This is the instruction they got, and I think that this is why I said before that the Minister a Education has to stand up and say, we decided that, the government take responsibility, and if he feels they were wrong, well we were wrong. But don't blame the school board. Then you wouldn 't have all this adve rse publicity that we're having and all these fights - and boy I can promise you a lot of troub le if this keeps up at the next electi on of the school board. It will be a ques tion of French against English. And we 'r e trying to unite this country, not to divide it.

So I think that the Minister in all sincerit}v, with out any embarrassment, I think he should make this comment. And I think that as soon as possi ble, I would suggest anyway, that the government would replace this term for those whose mother tongue is French and give everybody , who are qualified mind you. I think there should be an entrance exam, but every body. This is what I wanted in 163 and this is what I want now.

Because if I go in my little corner and even if I speak beautiful French, it's only part of it, I want the people to unders tand, to have a chance to speak French, to realize that we're not that bad, we're just the same kind of citizen as anybody else; and that we love Canada the same as every body else. You can see the people from Quebec coming here , and I was talking to one not too long ago, and all he had been taught was to hate the English people . It wasn't just the English people, it was "le maudit anglais" (the damn Englishman) . And when he was here a couple of years he realized how ridiculous that was.

Because .he had a chance to see. This is what I'm asking, that we give a chance to the English-spe aking people to see what 1the French people are . And look at this exchange of students that we're having now. This is one of the gre atest thi!lgs - for Confedera tion ;. this is the greate st project that we'v e had with the . . . . . Christian and Jews doing now, the exchanging of these stud ents. I haven't heard one complaint. They all think it's terrific. The Attorn ey-General himself who was the Minister of Education a few years back lived in Quebec, and he came back and he thought it was terrific also.

He was all enthused about thi s. Why do we have to fight over things like that ? Why dlo we have to play politics over things like that ? Is that anything to do ? Who wants national unity? Just the Liberals ? Just the NDP? Just the Conservativ es ? I don't think so. I don 't think there 's any need to be em barrassed on a thing like this. I think that we should get toget her. I hope that this bill that 's

•9 14 March 14 , 1966 (MR. DESJARDINS cont'd) ... going to come - I hope that this time it's really thought of and the government, the Minister of Education will see that there 's no trap, nothing set for the election. The French people here in Manitoba do not control one single seat and I in St. Boniface included, in any provincial election, provincial House . If anything this is going to go - where I'm trying to play politics here, I'm hurting myself and I'm hurting my party.

I'm just making a plea for national unity and I think on this thing that the Minister should tell us now or sometime in the House, all right the government will recognize that this is not what they wanted at all, they're going to change this , and it wi ll not be French for those whose mother tongue is French anymore . It'll take a while. In principle it won 't be, ma ybe in practice it will be for a while, but at least the principle will be accepted.

In practice it will be because until we get more French teachers it'll have to be and until these other people start learning some French they won't be qualified to take this French. So it's not going to change that much for those people that are sincere. Those that are just looking for a way to use the word segregation or anything else, they won't be satisfied. Let's not make bones about that; they will complain. But I don't think that we're going to just study the delinquent .or the people that are trying to tear this country apart.

I think it is time we looked at the other people what make a true Canadian tick. I think this is the important thing and I wou ld therefore then Mr. Chairman, ask the Minister to make a statement absolving the -- which I think anyway should be done unless there's certain things I don't know -- but absolving the School Board of St. Boniface of any wrongdoing at all. They followed what they thought is the law as set out by the govern ment. Certainly it wasn't the idea - I know enough of those people, and I know that they don't think that French should be only for those whose mother tongue is French alone.

Then the government -- I don't know, I think should be done immediate ly, in this Session. Now if the Government wants -i f they feel that this is not working - a lot of other things have been changed because they didn't work. It's not admitting defeat or admitting anything wrong for a government or a Minister to say, "Well, this is not working too well, let's try somet hing else. " I don't think that he'd be hurt politicall y in this at all.

If the government and the Minister feel this way, I think he should announce that from now on this will be taken out of there "for those whose mothe r tongue is French, " and it wi ll be for those who can qualify to take this course and for those who are willing and would like to have this education. This is all I can say on this , Mr. Chairman. MR. FROESE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make some more comme nts on the Minis ter's salary.

Thereare a few questions that were not answered the other time when I spoke, and also because of the Teachers' Retirement Allowances Fund coming under the Resolution of the Minister's Salary, and I have certain questions on that one as well.

On the previous occa sion when I spoke, I asked several questions in connection with the TRAF, or the Teachers ' Ret irement Allowances Fund changes, whether there were any changes in coverage ; whether there were the same privileges of withdrawing; and whether or not re quests had been received from teachers to stack the Canada Pension Plan onto this Teachers ' Retirement Allowances Fund. And also , the question of what happens to the funds being held by the present Retirement Allowances Fund now that it is integrated. Does the Canada Pension Plan have any authority as far as investment is concerned?

Will there be any interference on their pa rt? What portion of the funds that are being paid go to the Canada Pension Plan and will not be retained by the Retirement Allowances Fund? Just how is this integration going to affect the plan? Are any of the funds going to be removed from this section? Then I also note from the Financial Stateme nt as contained in the Departm ent's report on Page 158, that there are a terrific amount of withdrawals. I notice here that the statement says that there are $610 , 324 that were withdrawn from the Fund. This represents well over 20 percent, I think around 22 percent.

What is the reason for this? Is this because of the female teachers leaving the prof ession, or what's the cause of this , because I think this is almost an abnormal amount to be withdrawn from a plan. Then I also noted that our Account B is alm ost depleted after you pay for half the cost of the pensions in a given year. Last year half of that cost amounted to $677, 50 1, so all that was left in Account B was $89 ,6 96, Supposing this account will be overdrawn next year. How is it replenished or how is it accounted for ?

I notice also on the following page a list of the various stocks and Government Bonds being held by the fund but there is no yield given, that is in percentage of interest. I think ' L I .. I

.M arch 14, 1966 91 5 (MR . FROESE cont'd) .... this would be of interest to the committee to know what the different bonds do yield, because we know from other funds, where the investments were made in earli er years, that the return is much smaller. I also note from the report that the average yield runs around five percent which is, I think, a f:iir return. These were some of the questions I had in connection with the Retirement Allow ances Fund.

I asked the Minister the other day how the team of school inspectors -h ow it was work ing out and what were the benefits that accrued from having 'team· inspection of schools , and whe ther this was going to be extended this year. Also in connection with that, we have a very short report in the departmental report on the General Course , which is very brief. Is this one reason why we have team inspections, that we brought in the General Course and that we wanted a better evaluati on? Just a little more information on the subject I think would be valuab le to the committee .

Then in one of the - was it in Highlights or was it in the other report that we got - there was mention made of a possible two-year teacher training course. Could the Minister give us a littl e more information on that, because it seems to me that this could act as a deterrent in teachers emering the profession if they have to go throug h a two-year training course be fore they are licensed to teach. This would also naturall y mean the cost of teachers ' sa laries would be hig her because the cost of training would natur ally have to be reflected in the sala ries paid to the teachers . What is the intention?

Is it to have the two years in two consecutive years, all in one, or would there be an intermediate period whereby they would gain some experience and then later on continue for another year of teacher training. One further question I have is in connection with bursari es. In other years we have been told that a consider ab le number of bursa ries were not spoken for and were left over. I haven •t checked the report too cl osely on this for this last year, but I have people coming to me and tel ling me that they have applied for bursaries and have been refused. Is this the case ?

Can we not accommodate all people that do app ly , or what percentage of the people that do apply are refused a bursa ry ? I think this is some thing that shou ld be looked into because one of the people that approached me on it had passed his high school and he was teaching. He is attend ing university now and he intended to write a thesis and he wished to have some money to spend in order to do some research work. He had applied for a burs ary and had not been able to get the necessary funds. I would also ask the Minister whether we could probably have a displa y of the new text books that are being issued.

Probably these could be displa yed in the Library and members could, at their leisure, go and have a look at them. I think this would be worthwhi le , and this 'could probabl y lE arranged. These were a few of the items that I thought I would ask the Minister because we are still on the Minister's Salary and especiall y since the Retirement Fund Al lowances are covered by the first motion. MR . SHOEMAKE R: Mr .

Chairman, I could hardly be accUlsed of holding up the Minister's Salary because I have not made one comment to date on the Department of Education, but I would just li ke to know whether or not I missed the Minister's reply to a certain chall enge that was made by the Honourable Member for Emerson. I thought I heard him recommend that as regards to Phase No . II, that it woul d be to the advantage of everyone in the Province of Manitoba if a province-wide referendum was held rather than to allow the various divisions to proceed with a referendum as provided for in Bill 39.

Now I know that I have spoken to many trustees and many school teachers who have said that the Bi ll 39 is complete ly unworkable . Now I d ·::m't know whether it is quite that bad, but my guess is that up to now just nobody - nobody has complied with the necessary provisions to provide for a referendum. I don't think that one vote has been he Id in the province yet. The Minister, I think, said that a pilot project would be carried out in the Interla ke to see how a school division would work that embraced elementary education and secondary education.

Now surel y we have had one division, if you want to call it that, in the province that has had 20 years' experience in this regard, and I refer onee again to the Dauphin-Ochre area, and you will recall, Mr. Chairman, because I think that you spent the same number of years in this House that I did , of a very interesting discussi on that I had with the present Attorney-General and the former Minister of Ed ucation on this whole subject.

Because if you go back to 1959 when the province was voting on the recommeadations of the Royal Commis sion and providing for the setting up of the various school divis ions, the Dauphin -Ochre area were allo wed to dela y or postpone their vote to November - I think it was -w hereas the rest

91 6 March 14, . 1966 (MR. SHOEMAKER cont'd) .... of the Province voted in February, I believe, and then during the campaign in Dauphin which was carried out about October and probably the first part of November, the then Minister of Education and the member that represents that area went out and advised his own people to vote against his school division plan because he said that what they presently had and what they had since 1946 was really in effect a lot better plan than the school division plan. Mr.

Chairman, I see my honourable friend the Attorney-General's ears are. now picking up, and I hope that he will not interject this time as he did six or seven years ago because I'm satisfied that in the interval that he has at long last conceded that it was a better plan that the one that we presently have. I agree that it is a better plan, but seven years ago he denied it. He denied that it was and he denied having said a lot of things that he said out on the hustings prior to the refere ndum up there.

Now I asked as long as seven or eight years ago, when could the rest of the province expect to rece ive the same consideration that the Dauphin-Ochre had enjoyed for 20 years ? It looks to me as if my .honourable friend the Minister of Education is now providing for the same consideration for the rest of the province when he introduced Bill 39 a year ago, and then when we received the second phase program here the other day. So I think that .this is a step in the right direc tion but it's 20 years late, it seems to me, because it is exactly 20 years since the Dauphin-Ochre are a was implemented.

I don't often re ad from the Dauphin Herald because I don't get it, but I just happen to have a copy of the D�phin Herald in press Wednesday, January 26. The editorial is quite interesting on this very subject and it's headed, "By the Way. By the way, we read with interest the news report about the historic meeting of the executive of the Provinc ial Teacher I and Trustee Organizations to consider joint action on current problems facing Manitoba's public school system.

The two reso lutions they unanimously adopted call on the Provincial I Government to do two things which few people in Dauphin-Ochre area system would quarre l with, to take steps aimed at bringing both elementary and secondary education under the authority of the Division Boards which would then administer what we have known for nearly twenty years as the Area System, and to substantially increase the province's financial support for the public school education, " and so on, and there's a whole editorial on it.

So I this just points. up what we have been saying most of the time, that here is an area that has enjoyed for twenty years a system of education that we are now going to bring about, and of course --(Interjection) --Yes, and a few other places. Now twenty years ago -twenty years ago, surely this government was not in power, and surely twenty years ago the government of that day had some fore sight in the field of education. Well, Mr. Chairman, there is one other question that I'm still waiting for some com menta on. Mr.

Chairman, I don't know whether the Honourable Leader of the NDP and I are both speaking to the Minister, or whether he's listening to him and not me . - ..., (Interjection) - Well, whatever suits the occasion. I see you are yawning there but I don't often sleep and stand up. Now, Mr.

Chairman, there is one other matter to which I have not yet received an intelligent reply, either at the last session or this session, because I have said that I rather endorse a lot of the statements and comme nts and recommendations that a fellow by the name of Bobby Bend made and continues to make on so many occasions, and I know that my honour able friend knows of which I speak. But what the whole theme of a lot of Bobby Bend's messages seem to be, "What in the world is the point of a fellow having to have first year university if he wants to be a barber for the rest of his life, " for instance , he says.

"If he can cut hair and if he can change a dollar bill, well surely he doesn't need all of this highfalutin education." Well, I still haven't received an answer from my honourable friend as to whether or not he endor ses some of Mr. Bend's ideas. I noticed, Mr. Chairman, that an ad that is currently in some of the papers put out by the Department of Education, Vocational Branch, Special Training Opportunity, it states that applicants must have -this is for certain courses -applicants must be 17 years of age and have completed Grade 11, or the consent of the principal. Now I wonder what does that mean?

It says that you must have (

a) have completed Grade 12; or (

b) the consent of the principal. Now this suggests that maybe if he had Grade 9 and could pass another examination that he might qualify for admittance to MIT. I don't know. I could send it over to my honourable fr iend if he would like to have a look at it. And so, Mr. Chairman, I will have some more commen ts to make when we get down to school tax rebates and other items that are most interesting I see,. but there's one other one

March 14 , 1966 91 7 (M R. SHOEMAKER cont1d) .... that I might ask at the moment. You will recall, Mr.

Minister, that I said of a meeting that I attended at Neepawa on January 28, that one of the speakers - I think it was from the Department of Ed ucation but it ma y not have been, he ma y have been a school teacher that made this comment - but anyway someone made the comment that 50 .per cent of the children that are presently attending our elementary schools wil l be called on to fill jobs that are not yet created, and I think I saw my honourable friend the Minister nod his head in the affirmative on that one when I was speaking a month ago on this subject.

Now I asked the question then and I ask it of the Minister now, whose job is it to deter mine and to assess what the job requirements are for the future and then to train the people and our children and students accordingly. I am not certain whe,ther this little booklet that each and every member has on his desk,or should have there, came from the Department of Education or not. It's called the "The Educational Research, " and it's enclosed with a lettar from the Canadian Council for Research in Education.

Perhaps the Minister can tell me when he re plies whether or not this was published under the authority of the Department of Education, and if it was not, then what is he doing about the recomme ndations that are presented in it, because it looks to me as if there are some pretty valuable reconunendations and comments in it. So, Mr. Chairman , I will look forward to receiving some comments from my honour able friend on some of these questions. MR. JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman , I think I should treat these in reverse order of their pres

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	27-5-39
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	27th 5th hansardpdf 39.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	4589a41784fafd92e09b4f759b2c9e337a6e8ae8

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