Manitoba Hansard — 17 July 1986 (Sitting 48A, 33rd Legislature, 1st Session)

33-1-48a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, 17 July, 1986. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon. M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Prese nting Reports by Stand ing and Sp ecial Committees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. A. MA CKLING: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to table the Annual Report of the Consumer and Corpo rate Affairs Department for the year encompassing 19 84-85. MADAM SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS HON. L.

DESJARDINS introduced, by leave, on behalf of the Honourable Attorney-General, Bill No. 44, The Judgment Interest and Discount Act;

Loi sur les taux d'interet et d'actualisation des sommes allouees par jugement. (R eco mmended by Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor). ORAL QUESTIONS MTX - projected losses MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System. In today's committee hearing, we had figures given to us for the year ending March 31, 19 86, for MTX Telecom Incorporated.

In view of the fact that they are projecting a loss, that accounts receivable are up $3. 1 million to $10 .9 million, at the same time that sales have decreased $500,000 to $8.3 million and the total exposure of MTX is now at $16.4 million, will the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System ask for an independent audit by the Provincial Auditor to assure Manitobans that their telephone bills will not be used to subsidize losses incurred in Saudi Arabia providing telephonian business opportunities to Saudi Arabian sheiks? MADAM SPEAK ER: The Honourable Min ister responsible for MTS. HON. A.

MACKLING: Madam Speaker, I would like to indicate that the operations of the MTX were conceived and began initiation under a previous administration. Final incorporation took place under an NDP administration, but the whole principle of telephone companies across North America investing, or at least allowing their expertise to be sold internationally, is a very common one.

Every major Telecom in North America is doing this and in the case of the Manitoba Telephone System, the facts that I put on record this morning before the committee indicates approximately $2 million net net revenue flowed to the Manitoba Telephone System during the period 19 79 to 19 85.

In addition to that, Madam Speaker, total salaries and benefits were paid to workers, millions of dollars which were returned to Manitoba, spent in Manitoba, on which taxes were paid in Manitoba, the total gains for the people of Manitoba for the investments that the Manitoba Telephone System has made in Saudi Arabia are very, very significant. For the honourable memb er to be sugges ting that somehow the investments that we have made, as a corporation in the Middl e East, are taking away revenues from Manitoba are absolutely false. lt's the reverse that's true.

Madam Speaker, I am as convinced as I am of anything that the honourable member wants to stage a scare about the investments we are making, but despite the facts we put on the record, that indicates that those ventures pay big dividends for the shareholder, the people of Manitoba. MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, I have a question for the Minister for the Manitoba Telephone System.

If the alleged facts the Minister has just put on the record are true, why then is he afraid to have the Provincial Auditor, in an independent fashion, examine those year-end reports and explain to the people of Manitoba why accounts receivable are growing at an alarming rate, and why his MTX staff could not explain the reasons for those accounts receivable increasing with no aging schedule, with no indication of collectibility, Madam Speaker? MADAM SPEAKER: I do hope that the honourable member is not impugning the accuracy of information given to the House by a Minister. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, I am indicating that the Minister, in his answer, mixed apples and oranges. MTX is a net loser to the people of Manitoba and he cannot hide that fact, and if that fact is not true, Madam Speaker . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. D. ORCHARD: . . . why is he afraid to have the Provincial Auditor conduct an independent audit of the MTX business affairs? What is he afraid of? HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Sp eaker, if the honourable member would like us to call in the Auditor 1890

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 whenever he would like to stage the scene that there is a problem . . . MR. D. ORCHARD: You have nothing to worry about HON. A. MA CKLING: Madam Speaker , there is no problem when you have a corporation that during the four, five-year period of its operations has resulted in millions of dollars of money being paid to employees that otherwise would not be working in Manitoba, that money flowing back as wages in Manitoba; but in addition to that, Madam Speak er, $8.8 million of goods being purchased from Manitoba to service the contracts of MTX in Saudi Arabia.

Those are multimillion dollar benefits. The honourable member can use all the scare tactics that he wishes. He thinks he has the stage in which he can do some vocal dancing and scare the people of Manitoba that we should not, like other telephone companies, whether it be SaskTel, Alberta Tel, B.C. Tel, allow our expertise to be sold at net benefits to the people of Manitoba. He is so blinded with his narrow philosophy about the role of a public enterprise that he would emasculate and prevent public enterprise from being a successful entrepreneur for the shareholders, the people of Manitoba. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Madam Speaker , my question is to the Premier. The report of the Provincial Auditor, March 31, 19 85, has indicated in its review of MTX Telecom Services Incorporated: "Our review disclosed that several aspects of the management information system were not operating at a satisfactory level.

In particular, we are concerned that the areas of planning, budgeting and financial reporting to the board have not yet received sufficient attention." In view of the fact, Madam Speaker, that in today's review of MTX Annual Reports, information that was requested on Tuesday was not made available, was not reported to the committee, would the First Minister take it upon himself on behalf of the ratepayers of Manitoba, an order, an independent audit into the affairs of MTX to assure that Manitoba ratepayers and Manitoba taxpayers are protected from the hemorrhage of funds to Saudi Arabia? HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, this is, in essence, the question that was posed to the Minister responsible for the Telephone System. I concur with the response given by the Minister for the Telephone System. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Premier.

Given that our credit rating as a province has been placed on credit watch by Standard and Poor's, and that MTS is investing a further $8.5 million in the MTX Corporation this year in Saudi Arabia, and that we were told this morning at committee that this company, MTX, has accounts receivable of $10 .9 million and annual sales of only $8.3 million, has the Premier been fully informed about this particular investment; and is he satisfied that this investment is in the best interests of the people of Manitoba? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, as the Minister responsible for the Telephone System has indicated, taking the full space of the time which MTX has operated on behalf of the Manitoba Government, MTS, along with other telephone systems across the country, insofar as the Saudi Arabia operations are concerned, it has on the whole been a successful operation. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, having reviewed the concerns that have been placed on the table with respect to the viability of this corporation and the information that was given in committee, and indeed some of the comments of the Provincial Auditor about the corporation, has the Premier concluded that this is the most appropriate use of the scarce dollars that his government has at its disposal, to put a further $8.5 million in loan capital in MTX for business that is primarily being conducted in Saudi Arabia? HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, with the telephone system, not only in Manitoba but in other parts of Canada, enjoying less revenues because of changes in the overall communications system, there's need for our telephone systems, including the Man itoba Telephone System, to undertake investments to offset indeed what is a loss in revenues as a result of satellite developments and other communication developments in order to ensure that we maintain, in the Province of Manitoba, the lowest rates, according to all reports that I've received, of any jurisdiction in North America. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, that may have been the origi nal intent of the corpora tion, but this corporation is now losing money and its business prospects are severely damaged by the dropping world price of oil, which affects the revenues and the available resources of Saudi Arabia. Has the Premier looked at this in the recent past to see whether or not this is still the most appropriate use of taxpayers' dollars, when we have scarce loan capital and a credit watch on our credit rating? HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , the Minister responsible for the Telephone System advises me that the Leader of the Opposition is providing the House with incorrect information, and asking me questions relating to material that is incorrect. 1891 I would ask the Minister to correct the Leader of the Opposition . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister responsible for MTS. HON. A. MACKLING: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I know it's difficult for the aspiring leader, the Member for Pembina, to restrain himself, but I would like to correct the record for the Leader of the Opposition The investment that MTX is making of $8.5, $2 million of that is additional investment in MTX operations in

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 Saudi Arabia; $6 million dollars of that 8.5 million is North American and Far East. There are exceptionally strong markets for teleco mmunications, telephone expertise in various parts of the world, and those include New Zealand where we have some people at the present time. Honourable members seem to think that we shouldn't be trading in our - (Interjection) - expertise MADAM SPEAKER: Order please.

All members are aware of the formula for question period, in that one memb er asks a question and the other mem ber answers, which means that we do not get into a discussion across the floor from our seats. The Honourable Minister responsible for MTS, briefly. HON. A. MACKLING: Thank you, Madam Speaker, for restoring order so that the honourable members can receive the answer. We are, like other telephone companies, investing the use of highly-skilled technical people from Manitoba to the profit of the people of Manitoba, returning tax dollars and benefits here and helping other parts of the world in the process.

MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, we have been told in the past that the business prospects for MTX were excellent, just as we're being told today. My question for the Premier is, given that last year MTX lost $370,000, this year it is projected again to lose money. Is he satisfied that we are still wisely investing - he can check with the Min ister responsible for the Telephone System on those facts if he's unaware - is he satisfied that this is still a wise investment of our scarce resources in this sort of corporation that is exporting our expertise, presumably. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , the total returns to the Manitoba Telephone System through MTX is in fact a positive one. They lost this year, I'm advised by the ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable the First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The loss projected is $90,000 in respect to this year, as against the positive return over the entire period of the operations of the MTX. Child abuse MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Community Services.

With regard to the 19 85 Annual Report of the Children's Hospital Child Protection Centre, Madam Speaker, on which on Page 13 they state in part: "The reabuse of children is always of great concern; to have children with six and seven episodes of documented abuse (see Table 3, Page 10) is a travesty and a dreadful commentary on our community system and our society.'' And my question to the Minister is: Has she had an 1892 opportunity to review this report and investigate these statistics? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services. HON. M.

SMITH: Madam Speaker, this is one of the facts that we have asked the Review Committee to look at specifically. I think that those repeat stats are the most disturbing in the entire report and I certainly undertake to ask specific questions now, but also to ensure that the Review Committee, not only reviews the stats, but comes up with any recommendations possible to improve the management of these cases. MR. G.

MERCIER: Madam Speaker, in view of the Table 3 which indicates that it is grave concern that 72 children now have definite abusive episodes documented for the second time; 22 for the third; 7 for the fourth and 1 each for the sixth and seventh times, and in view of the fact that the Minister during Estimates was only able to tell us of 55 cases of situations in which children had been abused for a second time and had no information with respect to children abused more than two occasions, has she had an opportunity to examine these statistics in the light of her questions given to her by her department during the Estimates?

HON. M. SMITH: Madam Speaker, there has been dif ferent figures that come thr ough the two departments, partly because they set different criteria for collection. But I agree that discrepancy is disturbing to me and I certainly want an explanation and a coordination. MR. G. MERCIER: I appreciate that this whole area is under review and I believe, Madam Speaker, by two competent individuals. I congratulate the government for the people who have been appointed to handle this review.

But, in view of these statistics, would she ask her Acting Director of Child Welfare to consult immediately with the Child Protection Centre in order to assure people in Manitoba that these 72 children who have been abused for a second time already - which is one of the main concerns we've expressed on this side of the House - will not join the ranks of the numbers of children who have been abused for the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh time? HON. M. SMITH: Madam Speaker , the whole area of child abuse and the handling of it is a concern we all have.

We inherited a situation where the Child Protection Centre had received no funding. Directly, it should be funded under Health Sciences Centre Hospital. They did not fund. We have been funding and working to build a system wide, early detection, prevention and treatment system, Madam Speaker. The fact that all the systems are not thoroughly meshed and whatever, I don't feel apologetic about. I think what we've been working at is the achievement of an integrated system. We will bend all effort to achieve that, Madam Speaker.

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 Homemakers -equal pay by MPIC MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speak er, my question is to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation. In light of studies which indicate that homemakers work an average of 60 hours per week, will the Minister explain the criteria for a decision by M PlC which gives homemakers, sustaining bodily injury which render them incapable of performing household tasks, an indemnity of $15 0 per week or 58 percent of the minimum wage?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister responsible for MPIC. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Thank you, Madam Speak er. When this matter was being looked at last fall, we recognized that there was an inequity under the existing regulatiions, that the benefit that was to be paid was considerably less than what was being paid to a person who was working. The $15 0 is not all related to the value that the homemaker may provide, but it certainly was an improvement over the previous benefits that were being paid.

When we have the disability benefits being paid to a wage earn er, the benefits are a percentage of the wage that is foregone. In the case of a homemaker, there are no wages, but $15 0 is a recog nition of the valuable service that is being provided. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: A new question to the Minister of Labour, would he explain, in light of his government's commitment to the principle of pay equity, what steps his ministry will take to rectify this affront to the principle of pay equity? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. A.

MACKLING: I think, Madam Speaker, it is becoming quite rightly recognized that women and men - because there are men staying at home now and raising children - are performing a very valuable role in society. We are, as a society, now having to recognize that work has value, and that our systems have to reflect that. I appreciate the concerns the honour able member has. I think we have all indicated our support for homemakers' pensions, and I'm happy to indicate that we are, as a government, fully supportive of efforts to recognize the value of people who are at home raising families. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: A new question to the Minister responsible for the Status of Women. No work in our society has been more devalued than that of homema kers. Will the Min ister, in her broad responsibility for her ministry, take urgent steps to gua rantee non-discrimina tion in payments to homemakers from MP IC? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister responsible for the Status of Women. HON. J.

WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Madam Speaker, as my colleagues previously have indicated, this government is concerned about economic security for all women. lt is for that reason that we have paid particular attention to the proposals of the Federal Government for pension security for older women. The staff at the Women's Directorate, along with staff at Finance and other departments, are pursuing very actively some concrete proposals that will ensure security for older women. We believe that will go a long way towards addressing this inequity. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights, with a final supplementary.

MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Madam Sp eaker , a final supplementary. Will the Minister responsible for the Status of Women accept, on behalf of her responsibility for women, her government's responsibility to meet the needs of women under provincial corporations? HON. J. WASYLYCI A�LEIS: Madam Speaker , our priority is to ensure equal conditions and opportunities for all women. We will be pursuing policies and programs that will meet the needs of women at home and women in the workplace.

One of our most important initiatives towards advancing the cause of equality for women has been pay equity, a proposal that has yet to receive overwhelming support from the Member for River Heights. I would hope that she would join us in support for this proposal, so that we can achieve longer-term benefits for all women. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: My question is to the Minister responsible for the Status of Women. As the Minister responsible for the Status of Women, is the Minister consulted when changes such as $15 0 are being paid to women?

Is she being consulted to see if this is an adequa te amount to pay women who are in the home and cannot perform their duties? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister responsible for the Status of Women. HON. J. WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Madam Speaker, my staff at the Women's Directorate is working to assist all departments in the development of policies relating to the status of women. Consultation mechanisms are being put in place. We will be developing a long-term strategy for dealing with all these issues.

However , it should be pointed out that the development of policies in this and any other area occurs in stages, and we will be ensuring input on a regular basis. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Madam Speaker, to the same Minister, in light of the fact that the MPIC has a giant surplus, would the Minister take it upon herself to review the $15 0, speak to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation, and get that amount raised to something that is reasonable and equitable? HON. J. WASYLYCIA- LEIS: I will certainly be following this issue up, along with many others. However, I think 1893

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 it's important to note that, prior to this recommendation, there was absolutely nothing available for women in this category. So I think, while we can't achieve total progress overnight , I don 't think it would be in the int erests of women generally to come in the way . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. J. WASYLYCIA-LEIS: I would hope that members oppos ite would be in favour of progress towards achieving greater equality for women, and not come in the way of steps that are taken towards meeting that goal.

Housing - Northern Manitoba MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My questions are for the Minist er of Housing in regard to housing in Northern Manitoba . In recent year, Madam Speake r, resid ents of northern communities have had increasing difficulty in obtaining mortgage financing for new homes from CMHC. Recently, there has been a proposal that CMHC turn over such financing to the provinces . I'd like to ask the Minister what her position is in regard to this proposal. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Hou sing. HON. M.

HEMPHILL: Thank you , Madam Speaker. This was one of the issues that came up at a recent Housing Conference of Ministers in Vancouver. It was one of three items that we put on the agenda , and I'm pleased to say that we were successful in achieving some agreement from the other provinces and the Federal Government on all these issues. There has been a fundamental problem for a number of years that CMHC has been refusing to provide mortgage insurance at a reasonable rate in northern and remote towns . This means that they can't get private lenders ' money.

So we're virtually the only game in town, and people cannot build and cannot get insu rance . Our position has been that, even where the market is weak like remote northern towns, even where the costs of construction are greater than the market rate, and even when there is risk like remote northern towns and the inner city, there has to be insurance provided for the building of homes. We said at this conference that we thought the Federal Government should be providing it, but we were willing to sit down and discuss sharing the risk with them to provide mortgage insurance. MR. S.

ASHTON: A further question , Madam Speaker. In view of the fact that adequate northern hous ing has also been restricted because of the application of inadequate and inapplicable southern building standards to northern conditions , I'd like to ask the Minister what actions she has taken in regard to trying to get northern standards for northern conditions accepted . HON. M. HEMPHILL: This is another point we made very clearly at the conference , and that is that we want to stop building homes that cost $100 ,000, about double what we think has to be spent , because we are forced to follow southern codes.

We're litera lly building a three bedroom house with kitchen, living room, dining room, corlon floors, drywall that nobody knows how to repair, for people who are fishermen , who earn $10 ,000 a year and don 't know what to do with these southern cas tles that have been built. We want flexibility , Madam Speaker . We want to be able to build homes that suit both the climate and the lifestyle of the people in the communities. We particularly , Madam Speaker , want to stop wasting public money, spending twice as much to build a home as we need to spend .

We have asked for flexibility , and the Federal Government has indicated that they will allow us to try more models and more flexible prototypes for building homes in the North. Port of Churchill MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. D. ROCAN: Thank you , Madam Speaker, my quest ion is to the Minister of Highways and Transpor tation .

In light of the welcome news concern ing insurance rates for ships utilizing the Port of Churchill , I refer the Minister to promises made by the Premier during the election of 1981 and again in 1986 , when the Premier promised to have a variety of goods , such as liquor, motor vehicles , construction equipment , including Saskatchewan potash, and the goods of all government departments and Crown corporations shipped thro ugh the Port of Churchill.

I would ask the Minister to inform the House of the number of government departments and Crown corporations shipping their goods thro ugh the port , the volume of those shipments and the volume of shipments of liquo r, motor vehicles and construction equipment since 1981. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, we have indicated that the Province of Manitoba is not a major importer of goods into the province that can be brought in through the Port of Churchill.

We have indicated that there is a need to review the possibility of additional commodities being shipped through the Port of Churchill , including such things as alumina that could be used in an aluminum smelter , of potash being exported, timber, coal and other products . Those are being explored with the studies th at are being undertaken by the Province of Manitoba and the Government of Canada under the sub-agreements.

But we have also indicated that the volumes of grain that have to be put through the Port of Churchill to make it viable have to be at least 600,000 tonnes per year, and that's what the resolution that is in the House calls for, Madam Speaker. 1894 The Wheat Board and the Federal Government have not shown any resolve in making sure that the port

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 would be operating in a viable way by having at least 600,000 tonnes of grain shipped through that port. That's what we are insisting, and that's where the Member for Turtle Mountain could be making his representation to his counterpart, Charlie Mayer, the member responsible for the Wheat Board, to ensure that happens in future years. MR. D. ROCAN: Madam Spe aker, with the new lowered insurance rates, would the Minister now undertake to have the Premier live up to his election promises in this regard? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Clearly it is the action of this government, led by the Premi er, which has resulted in substantial improvements with regard to the conditions at the port and the amounts of money that are being put in, provincially, to that federal responsibility, because they have not undertaken act ions. Successive governments, Liberal and Conservative, have not undertaken action at the port, so we're having to do it. We're putting our money where our mouth is, Madam Sp eaker. MR. D. ROCAN: Madam Spe aker, his answer begs me to put the final supplementary.

On October 29, 19 81, the Premier said, "This will replace the lip-service of the current Conservative Government. The only threat to Churchill is inaction, and an NDP Government will eliminate that inaction." MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mada m Speaker , I am quite surprised that any member from across the way would have the nerve to attempt to compare their record vis a-vis Churchill, 19 77 to 198 1, with the leadership and the investment on the . . . MR. H. ENNS: . . . three times the amount of grain shipped ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. MR. H.

ENNS: . . . twice the number of people living there ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. MR. H. ENNS: . . . three times the number of jobs MADAM SPEAKER: Would the Member for Lakeside please contain himself? I'm sure, because the Honourable Mem ber for Turtle Moun tain waited patiently to ask his questions while other members of the front bench had their opportunity, that he would like to hear the answer from the Honourable First Minister, if the Honourable Member for Pembina could contain himself long enough. MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, what did the Honourable Member for Pembina just do to contain himself?

I wish you would quit referring to me; I never said a word. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina is reflecting on admonishments from the Chair, and he had better withdraw them immediately! MR. D. ORCHARD: Withdraw what, Madam Speaker? MADAM SPEAKER: I am calling on the Honourable Member for Lakeside to withdraw those last comments to the Chair, now! MR. H. ENNS: Madam Speaker, I'd be happy to withdraw whatever remarks I made.

MADAM SPEAKER: lt's the Honourable Member for Pembina, I'm sorry, that I am asking to withdraw those last statements - (Interjection) - if the honourable members of the Opposition thinks it's so funny that a member stands up and chastises the Chair, then perhaps they should leave the Chamber until they can contain themselves. The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, I would like to know what comment I made to you that has enraged you so? I made no comment to you to prompt your outburst, Madam Speaker. I don't know what I'm to withdraw to you, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER: The honourable member is to withdraw the statements that he just said on his feet. The Honourable Memb er for Pembina has been disrupting question period all morning . . . MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, I will withdraw the comments, which said I did not make any comments, if that will make you happy. MADAM SPEAKER: I don't know whether it will make me happy, but it will certainly satisfy me for the moment. The Honourable First Minister. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you for your efforts to maintain decorum in this House, and I want you to know that all members on this side support your efforts to maintain decorum.

Madam Speaker, in the period from 1981 to the present, this New Democratic Party provincial administration, largely under the leadership in his department of the Minister responsible for Transportation, has entered into agreements with the Federal Government of joint federal-provincial action to enhance the lot of the Port of Churchill, agreements involving some millions of dollars by way of additional upgrading and improvement of the port facilities in Churchill. lt was this government, Madam Speaker, that has again and again reminded the federal Conservative administration, despite procrastination from time to time, of their obligations and responsibility.

Madam Speaker, the people of Churchill, by way of their vote in the last provincial election on March 18 demonstrated their endor sation of this government's record commitment to the Port of Churchill. 1895

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 Economic Security - tabling of Annual Report MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Gladstone. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank you, Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Employment Services and Economic Securi ty. I wonder, could the Minister tell us when he will be tabling his annual report so that the members can read it before Estimates. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Economic Securi ty. HON. L.

EVANS: Madam Speaker, as I indicated I believe to some members of the Opposition privately, we've been requested to change the date of our departmental year from a calendar year to a fiscal year. This means we've added three months to the annual report, so the report will be for a period of 15 months rather than 12. This has caused some delays. We have it now, I believe, in the printing stage, and we hope that it will be ready prior to the Estimates. If the printed copy, the final copy is not ready, we'll certainly make our best efforts to provide a photostat copy for the honourable member.

Brandon University - Perkins' settlement MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker, my question is directed to the First Minister. The First Minister tabled yesterday a letter dated Tuesday of this week to Mr. William Potter, Chairman of the Board of Governors of Brandon University. Knowing that Mr. Potter left Brandon for a five-week vacation on the day following the announcement of the settlement with Dr. Perkins, why was the letter addressed to Mr.

Potter and not the vice-chairman, since the final paragraph says, "I look forward to hearing from you on this matter in the near future"? How does that ensure a reply within a few days? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, the Acting Chair, Mr. Perkins, has the letter which is what one would anticipate when - Dr. Stewart - (Interjection) - no, I'm glad Mr. Perkins is not involved in this, since he is an interested party to the discussions. I would have thought that the Member for Brandon West, with all his experience as a public servant, would have realized that would be the case.

MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speaker, thank you. I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour, 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.

MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Su pply to be gr anted to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Health; and the Honourable Member for Kil dona n in the Chair for the Department of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - ENVIRONMENT AND WORK PLACE SAFETY AND HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: We are dealing with the Department of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health, Page 68.

The first resolution will be Resolution 62, but previous to that the Minister will have an opening statement. The Honourable Minister. HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If that is agreeable with the honourable critic, we'll look at the department first and, at the latter part, we'll also review the annual report of the Compensation Board as was done last year and the previous year. I am, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, indeed, honoured again to present the Estimates of the Department of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health.

Our government is committed to the protection and enhancement of the quality of the working, public and natural environments for the health, safety and well-being of present and future generations of Manitobans, and to provide the opportunity for all people to exercise influence over the quality of their living and working environments. To assist members in better understa nding the content of the departmental Estimates for 19 86-87, the department has for the first time participated in the preparation of supplementary information for the legislative review of Estimates. I hope the members did get this document.

This document was recently distributed to all members. lt is my hope that the provision of the additional information will benefit members during the Estimates review process. I also at this time wish to apologize to the members for not having been in a position to provide them with a copy of the annual report to this point in time. A number of complications are the cause for that. The department, as some mem bers know, was amalgamated as it presently stands for the last year's report with the addition that will appear in this year's report of the mining

section in the report for 19 84-85. The report is presently at the printers and could not be made available prior to the Estimates. I apologize for that. I wish to take this opportunity to publicly thank my staff, the many organizations, largely volunteer, such as the Manitoba Environmental Council, the Advisory Council on Work place Safety and Health, and the many hundreds of Manitobans who participated in the public consultative process. I would like to thank the many 1896

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 people involved in these organizations for their support, commitment and hard work in a$sisting me in working toward our goal of making our province a clean and safe place to live and work. I extend my sincere congratulations and encourage the continued participation by the many organizations whose goals and efforts continue to significantly contribute to the enhancement of our environment and in impr oving safety and health condi tions in the work place. I wish to now focus my remarks on the specific program areas of the department.

I will address my initial comments to the area of Workplace Safety and Health. I wish to highlight a number of activities that will take place or continue during fiscal year 19 86-87. The approval and filing of "The Workplace Health Regulation," developed in consultation with employers and employees from affected industries, will represent a major step toward outlining good occupational hygiene practices and specifications for both employers and employees to carry out their duties related to the prevention of occupational disease and illne ss.

Implementation of this regulation will be priorized on a sector basis and undertaken in phases. 1t has been estimated that in Manitoba, exposure to carcinogens in the workplace is responsible for about 100 cancer deaths and over $2.6 million in health treatment costs each year. The regulation will help to control exposure to hazardous substances in the workplace and in the long term reduce the incidence of occupational disease and death.

The Workplace Health Regulation combines three basic principles of occupational hygiene, namely assessment, evaluation and control with the workers' right to know and to participate. To this end, the regulation requires employers to work with their health and safety committees to accomplish the following: 1. List all materials and substances as well as hazardous materials present in the workplace; 2. Collect information about the contents and health effects of hazardous materials and develop methods to control exposure to these products; 3.

Set up an environmental monitoring program, where necessary, to assess worker exposure and compare the results with occupational exposure standards; 4. Make decisions on the need for and type of control measures to install and establish a program to regularl y monitor their effectiveness. The impacts of the regulation on small businesses in the province will be particularly important . . . therefore, a study has been initiated to assist the department in responding to the needs of small industries.

Other reg ula tion-rela ted initiatives include the develop ment of a Code of Practice Respecting Asbestos; the drafting, consultation, appr oval and implement ation of two addi tional Construction Regulations (these are parts three and four); review and revision of the Spray Processing Regulation; the final filing of a revised Mines Regulation; as well as a revised Regulation and Codes and Practices regarding Safety and Health Committees. During 19 86-87 the department will be concluding two studies funded through the Manitoba Jobs Fund.

The first study is a major investigation of Occupational Health Services in Manitoba. Components of the study include review of Occupational Health Service needs and existing resources in the province; current problems and limitations; and identification of options for delivery of appropriate services. The second study is a preliminary analysis of environmental, workplace, and community concerns with respect to the Flin Flon operation of Hudson Bay Mi ning and Sm elti ng. This study will assist the department in determining action needs in this area.

Concerns identified in the study will require both federal and provincial consideration. I wish to also note that there is a comprehensive range of ongoing activities that will continue to be provided regarding workplace safety and health. Included within this category are activities delivered by the Safety and Health Inspectorate Branch, the Industrial Hygiene Branch, Educational Services Branch and Mines Inspection Branch. The Educational Services Branch is developing advanced workplace safety and health courses to meet the demand for additional training for safety and health committees.

The Agricultural Safety and Health Program continues to provide educational service to this important sector through developme nt and distribution of printed material and personal contact at rural fairs. The Safety and Health Inspectorate Branch is continuing to undertake its accident response, compliance monitoring and auditing, guidance and training activities so as to be more responsive to client needs. The department has continued its effort to ensure tha t The Workplace Safety and Health Act and regulations are complied with.

Enforcement training seminars have been held and an enforcement liaison officer has been appointed. In 19 85, 10 formal charges were laid under The Workplace Safety and Health Act for non-compliance, resulting in fines ranging from $10 0 to $5,000 being levied against the guilty parties. Among the ongoing activities of the Industrial Hygiene Branch, specifically in the area of indoor workplace air quality, activities include development of a tight or sick building protocol and activities related to lead in foundries.

The area of mine safety and health is of considerable concern for the department and is receiving substantial attention by the Mines Inspection Branch in light of the number of fatalities that have occurred in this sector in the past year. The second major thrust of the department is in the area of environmental management. The department has brought forward for consideration a Hazardous Waste Management Crown Corporation Act during this Session. This act will provide for the establishment of a Crown corporation to operate and manage a Manitoba Hazardous Waste Management System.

This is a major step as the government continues its steady progress towards the goals we set out in 1982, which will result in Manitoba having an integrated management system in place before it experiences significant toxic waste problems. 1897

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 In addition to bringing forward the legislation indicated, the Clean Environment Commission will also be undertaking a series of public hearings during this year to address the question of what type of system would be appropriate for Manitoba and facility site selection criteria. lt is also my hope that prior to the end of this year, I will be able to table for member consideration, a White Paper or discussion bill regarding the new environment act.

As well, the province has adopted recently a set of environmental principles of which I have copies here and will make them available for the members, who so desire. I have discussed these environmental princi ples with our own Manitoba Environmental Council, as well as with the Bruntland Commission on Economic Development and World Environment. The Bruntland Commission responded favourably to our environmental principles at this point, and the pri nciples have also for med the basis for the department's input into the United Nations conservation strategy.

The pollution control philosophy about the basis for environmental legislation and programs in the 1960's and the 19 70's achieved success in addressing pronounced pollution problems. However, it has been less than effective in preventing the incremental erosion of environmental quality. There is an immediate need for a new approach if we are to ensure a healthy and secure environment for future generations. The main provisions proposed for the new environment act will include:

(1) An effective and efficient site specific review process for any undertakings with potential environmental impact, in addition to those which discharge contaminants;

(2) A method for ensuring consistent public participation in decisions concerning environmenta l qu ality;

(3) Capability of considering the socio-economic impacts of environmental decision-making;

(4) Recognition of the mult i-jurisdictional aspects of envir onme ntal management; and

(5) Encouragement of the use of volunteer agencies for research, data gathering and policy advice. I would also indicate that the department intends to proceed with a number of regulations regarding the environment: (1) the manifest reg ulation; (2) environmental accident reporting regulation with respect to hazardous waste management. Both of the above-mentioned regulations will be circulated for public comment in the very near future.

(3) A revised waste disposal grounds regulation; (4) a revised gasoline and associated prod ucts reg ulation; (5) a revised reg ula tion to address incinerators; (6) a revised regulation governing livestock production operations relative to both the technical aspects and land use; (7) a revised regulation dealing with swimming pools and related facilities such as whirlpools and waterslides; (8) a waterwo rks and sewage disposal regulation; and finally, (9) a regulation addressing 802 emissions. This latter regulation will put in place Manitoba's contribution to the national effort to combat acid rain.

You will notice that an important num ber of regulations will be receiving attention. This is not unusual since the department is first and foremost a regu latory depart ment. lt should also be clearly understood, however, that all regulation development activities that take place within the department include a process of extensive consultation with those groups and parties that may be affected by those regulations. Of particular interest to Northern Manitoba are two initiatives that I wish to highlight. The first one is the undertaking of a major scrap metal cleanup within the Town of Churchill area.

This project, cost-shared equally with the Government of Canada, involves the removal and relocating to southern Manitoba for recycling 4,000 tonnes of scrap metal. This matter has been of concern to Chur ch ill residents for many years, and the abandonment of federal facilities makes it imperative that action be taken. The second project relating to Northern Manitoba that I wish to highlight involves the carrying out of a later study which will be relevant to Northern Manitoba in general.

This study, being carried out by the Churchill Northern Study Centre, is an initial step in dealing with the problem of non-returnable containers and bottles and other litter in Northern Manitoba.

I am most pleased to inform the members that the department, during Environment Week which took place recently and at which the critic was also in attendance - at least at the opening of part of the functions of that week - in cooperation and with the financial assistance of the City of Winnipeg and Environment Canada, undertook a project respecting the collection and proper disposal of household hazardous waste products, which enabled residents of the City of Winnipeg to drop off a variety of household hazardous chemicals and products.

Two hundred and eighty-six participants brought in over 12,0 00 litres of household hazardous waste. This included 183 different products, and it is my intention to make this an annual event. The depa rtment continue s to be fina ncially responsible for the operation of the Manitoba Waste Exchange. The Exchange was initially established during the 19 84-85 year on a 50-50 cost-sharing basis between the department and Environment Canada. Environment Canada has withdrawn its financial contribution from the exchange. The Manitoba Government now provides 10 0 percent of the funding support for this operation.

The Exchange, operated by the non-profit Biomass Energy Institute, cooperates with the Canadian Waste Materials Exchange in recycling material. The Exchange provides a local contact for Manitoba industry, and lists wastes that are available or wastes that are wanted by the industry. lt is then the responsibility of the specific industries to effect the exchange of such wastes. I would now like to move on to the area of pesticide management, in particular, and the area of pesticide container disposal and the pesticide use permit system.

With respect to the pesticide container disposal program, the department continues to provide technical support to participating municipal organizations. In the past season, 78 drums of pesticide residues were picked up, placed in storage in Gimli, and subsequently disposed. Based on these statistics, I believe that it is clearly demonstrated our approach has proven to be extremely successful in addressing the problem of pesticide container disposal. The second area regarding pesticides that I wish to briefly comment on is the pesticide use permit system.

This regulation, adopted approximately a year ago, is now fully implemented. As of this date, over 17 5 permits have been issued. Obviously, the use of pesticides 1898

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 continues to be a very sensitive issue. As a result, the department imposes a number of restrictions when permits are being issued. Some examples of these restrictions inclu de: no aerial app lication over residences, no spraying of school grounds while children are in school, no spraying of parks or ball diamonds while the public is present, and a 100 metre buffer zone has been established around residences of those who object to residential mosquito fogging.

I would now like to focus on acid rain, an issue that has received certainly substantial national, and also international, prominence over the past number of years. As members are no doubt aware, during an Environment Ministers Meeting in February of 19 85, Manitoba expressed its commitment to reduce total provincial S0-2 emissions to no more than 550 kilotons per year by 1994. The department is addressing implementation of this commitment with full consultation with various other provincial departments as well as the affected industries, principally lnco and HBM and S.

To achieve this reduction target of 550 kilotons per year, the department has, as I noted earlier, prepared a draft of a reg ulation respe cting permissible atmospheric emission limits of S0-2. Following further consultation with the affected companies, it is my hope that this regulation can be approved and implemented prior to the end of the current fiscal year.

Further, I can also advise you that Manitoba is financially providing $ 10 ,000, along with the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia and Environment Canada, to carry out a Target Loading Study in Western Canada, which is being conducted by the National Research Council. As well, we are continuing our own ongoing research on the effects of acid rain and are closely monitoring research in other provinces and countries from which we can benefit. My department will be heading the province's 10- year $ 10 0 million river renewal program for the Red and Assiniboine Rivers beginning this year.

At present, a detailed action plan is being developed in cooperation with other departments for public discussion in the near future. This is only one highly visible example of the departme nt's very substantial concern and responsibility for water quality in Manitoba, which includes water quality monitoring and the development of water quality objectives. The department will continue to closely monitor activities related to nuclear waste disposal concepts that may affect Manitoba. As you know, most Manitobans were gravely concerned about possible nuclear waste disposal sites in Minnesota.

Through prompt and well-reasoned intervention, in cooperation with the Federal Government and our neighbours in Minnesota and North Dakota, we were able to influence the United States Department of Energy site selection process. lt has now been indefinitely postponed. We also sought and received assurances from our own Federal Government that Manitoba is not being conside red for a nuclear waste reposito ry. The department will not, on the other hand, relax its vigilance but will indeed continue to track this very important issue.

While I have focussed most of my comments to this point on new or expanded activities the department is engaged in, and will continue to be engaged in during 19 86-87, I cert ainly do not want to overlook the numerous ongoing, routine environmental activities that take place.

In particular, I want to mention activities such as public health inspection; water, air and terrestrial quality monitoring; the enforcement of the Clean Environment Commission orders ensuring that existing water and air standards and guidelines are maintained; and insuring that environmental assessment and review procedures are applied wherever deemed appropriate and necessary.

The department also maintains one of Canada's most cost-effective environ mental laboratories, which supplies analytical service to both the Environme nt and Workpla ce Divisions of the department, as well as to other govern ment departments and to the general public for water supply testing. As I believe the situation to be with any department of government, there is always a wish that one could do more.

While I am certainly pleased we are able to proceed on so many fronts that are of interest and concern to Manitoba, I must stress that we continue to deliver services in our priority areas even under continued restraint. Before concluding, there are several other areas of departmental operation that I would like to touch upon very briefly. The Worker Advisor Office, established in September of 1986 continues to provide much-needed assistance to claimants having difficulty in resolving their claims with the Workers Compensation Board.

During this past fiscal year, this office established 714 new files and closed 695 files. Clearly these statistics indicate that the level of activity and the need for advisor involvement in assisting claima nts with their claims has not diminished. Further with regard to the Worker Advisor Office, I would also like to report that the Worker Advisor Training Program, which was initiated during the last fiscal year under the Manitoba Jobs Fund, will continue during the current fiscal year.

Under this program, four advisor trainees are undergoing extensive training and application of Workers Compensation Board and Worker Advisor procedures with the objective being that, on conclusion when these trainees return to their former work places, they will be well equipped to assist fellow workers in dealing with Workers Compensation Board matters. One term clerical support staff position has also been added under this project to provide office support and services. Mr.

Chairman, and members of the committee, I will leave other department-related matters to questions that may arise, and we'll answer them at that time. I wish at this time to conclude my remarks. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. The Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Just a slight correction on Page 18 when the Minister was making his remarks, he was talking about the Worker Adviser Office established in September of 1986.

I'm sure that it was just a misread. lt was 1982, as the Minister knows, and I would like that to go on record just so that his remarks are not misunderstood. 1899

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 MR. CHAIRMAN: lt's on the record. The Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to take this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to thank the Minister for his cooperation and he can expect the same type of cooperation from our side of the House. Inasmuch as the Minister has provided us with material in advance of his speech - as a matter of fact, he has given a copy of his opening remarks, and I want to thank him because it is of great assistance.

He has also provided us with the Suppl ementary Information for the legislative review on Manitoba Environment and Workplace Safety and Health, which is the first that I think that this has ever been done, and I thank him very much for that cooperation also. lt giv es us a better understanding of the department and I think, if we have a better understanding of the department, it gives us the opportunity of being able to present more intelligent questions for review. lt's not our intention to try and show the world how much we know about the department. lt's our intention to ask the Minister pertinent questions so that he can advise us that he is operating his department in the best, most efficient manner.

Our questions will be short and to the point, and I think that the Honourable Minister will probably make his answers short and to the point also. Did you get it all, or do I have to repeat it? - (Interjection) - You got it, okay. I have no aversion to the Minister's staff joining him at this point. MR. CHAIRMAN: If the staff would like to come forward. A MEMBER: But you're not finished with your opening comments? MR. A. KOVNATS: No, I'm not finished with my opening remarks. Please, they're most welcome.

I would like to, at this point, just advise the Minister that we have had the words "monitoring and reviewing" and "looking into the matter" and "waiting for a report," and I don't think that we can keep accepting this as an excuse when we're looking for information. I think that the Minister has reacted and has insisted that his department move quickly on particular subjects, and I respect the Minister for that.

But again, I would not like to have answers, and I give him fair warning that "monitoring" and "looking into" and "keeping an eye on" are not acceptable terms for questions that will be asked a little later on. As we know, there is new technology taking place in the world today, and the Minister's department is keeping up with this technology. I know that when we make decisions this technology will have an important factor on the making of these decisions. I do know some of the Minister's staff, and I do know them to be competent to the point that they are keeping up with the technology of today.

We have some important subjects concerning the handling of hazardous wastes and nuclear waste, and what we are going to do with it, Mr. Chairman. Sites have to be picked. I think the Honourable Minister will be probably advising us whether the sites have been picked and whether, in fact, these discussions are still ongoing as to where these sites will be located. These are all important aspects of the Minister's department, and I hope that he will be able to answer these questions when we get down to them.

I have been accused in the House, after I'd made some statements concerning I am a member of the Opposition and I can't have it both ways. The members of the government keep turning it to me and trying to ridicule those particular statements. I think that I can have it both ways when it comes to criticizing or suggesting that more monies be spent on particular programs and, by the same token, I can have it the other way when condemning some programs that are wasting money. So I'm the only one who stands up and admits that I can have it both ways.

I think that the government can have it both ways also, if they will listen. We have to spend money on programs that are important and cut back on programs that are not important, that are wasteful spending. I'm going to encourage the Minister to accept the responsibility of the environment, which includes the City of Winnipeg. it's not the Minister's fault, but in the past we have taken the responsibility of environment in the City of Winnipeg and said to the City of Winnipeg, this is your responsibility.

We sit back and we condemn them but we're not really in a position to do anything about correct ing the environment for the City of Winnipeg to our satisfaction. I would hope that the Minister would, somewhere in the future, stick his nose in and become more aware of the problems of the City of Winnipeg and the environmental damage that emanates out of the City of Winnipeg, particularly in the water supply in Selkirk.

I'll get back to that, too, because I had asked the Minister some questions on the water supply in Selkirk and there was some information that was imparted to me that I've now found out to be not quite so, but the Minister will have a chance to correct that at a later date. I think that we will be bringing in all kinds of things - the environment around Brandon. We're talking about the Clean Environment Commission making rulings on all these different locations.

I would like the Minister to be able to explain to this committee the actions of the Clean Environment Commission, because it is important and their duties are important. I hope that they won't be influenced by - we were talking about asbestos a little bit earlier on, and I see where in the Province of Quebec, where they do have products out of asbestos, that the people in the asbestos industry are yelling and screaming like there's no tomorrow, because of the environmental damage that has been coming out of asbestos. The people in the industry don't want to cut back. They don't want to do any correction.

I would hope that the Minister doesn't run into any problems such as that in Manitoba, where there's a conflict of interest, where people in the workplace, to protect their own livelihoods, are suggesting that we keep maintaining particular operations that are dangerous to the public and to the workers. Sometimes when your livelihood is affected, you change your attitude toward some of these things, and I hope the Minister won't be influenced, if it's a matter of encouraging some of these people to correct an environmental problem. 1900

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 I think that you can give them the opportunity of time, but time means danger, and we've got to hurry up these processes where there is a danger to the health of the people working in the workplace. If the Provincial Government has to invest some dollars to encourage it, rather than close down a particular operation, I would strongly recommend it. First of all, we've got to get the people who are in the business, and I think that I'm making reference to HBM and S and maybe to lnco, to clean up their act.

We have to encourage them to do so; and maybe we can even invest a few dollars to maintain their operation in Manitoba in a safe environment. I repeat that I'm not prepared to accept any more answers, like more studies, when it comes down to that. Mr. Chairman, the Minister made reference to acid rain and I'll just bring up one subject. When we were at an environmental conference in Quebec City, I was talking to a Minister of the Federal Government.

He was telling me that when it comes to acid rain, we can cooperate, and we must cooperate amongst ourselves, with Ma nitoba, Saskatche wan, Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta - we must have cooperation among these provinces when it comes to the dangers of the environment, which do include acid rain. There's a problem with the United States. These are our neighbours and our good friends and we must have some cooperation with them. I hope that we can change their attitude, as we have changed their attitude to the location of a nuclear waste site in the Red River Basin in Northern Minnesota.

I hope that we can change their attitude towards acid rain in the United States. I know that there's ongoing meetings between Canada and the United States. I hope the Minister will get involved also, in seeing that our environment is protected. I remember one of the statements that was made by a United States Senator about how he doesn't give a damn about how many trees we lose in Canada because of acid rain, but he would see that we could lose every forest and every tree in Canada rather than lose one position of one worker in his home riding that he represents. That's a hell of an attitude.

I think we've got to talk to them and get them to un derstand the dangers and the problems, and a lot of cooperation that goes with it. The Minister had made some remarks about Churchill. As a matter of fact, I had spoken to the Minister about it because it was an Order-in-Council. I'm not trying to embarrass the Minister. I think what we're trying to do is to get the best services out of both the Minister and his department, and the environmental critics and the people that support him. lt was concerning a major scrap metal cleanup.

I'm only making reference to a couple of things because I know that we can probably get down to it when we get down to the individual line by-line. The Minister has made remarks about the major scrap metal cleanup within the Town of Churchill area. I saw the Order-in-Council and the Order-in-Council, I think, shows a cost of $10 3,000, which seems to be exorbitant but I think if you were doing the job, maybe that's a legitimate cost. lt's supposed to be split 50-50 with the Federal Government and the Provincial Government.

There's 4,000 tonnes of solid, metallic waste and I wonder what justification we have in cleaning up Churchill rather than some other location. Who's paying for it? I see that there's $51 ,500 of Manitoba tax money going into that. lt's a good project; I can understand. lt's hazardous waste. At least it says hazardous waste on this Order-in-Council.

I really don't think that it was hazardous waste because I did check it out and it was put into bundles in Churchill and shipped down to Winnipeg, out to Selkirk and recycled, and is now being used at the Selkirk Rolling Mills, to the great advantage - somebody seems to be making a profit onit but it doesn't seem to be the Province of Manitoba. I wonder if the Minister would be able to make some remarks on that. All it seems is that it's a cost to Manitoba and a cost to the Federal Government. I had so much on my mind here. Was there something about the polar bears? A MEMBER: Mosquitoes. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Mosquitoes? Well, he's going to get the mosquitoes, don't you worry about that. That we're going to get to when we come down to line-by line. A MEMBER: lt's a small creature, though. MR. A. KOVNATS: The Minister has taken the opportunity of stopping the spraying in his particular area. I don't think it's his right and I think there are some people in the area that have to suffer because of the Minister's actions. I'm not really condemning it. I'm just putting it on the record that I know that the Minister, in my constituency, has said that he doesn't want spraying in a particular area.

I respect that, but I think that the Minister, if he's going to not allow spraying in that area, he's got to be able to suggest to the people in the area how they can protect themselves from the mosquitoes, rather than just slapping the mosquitoes, because some of them are big mosquitoes and, you know, they do fight back. I think that the Minister has accepted a responsibility, on Page 16 of his remarks, concerning the $10 0 million of renewal program for the Red River and Assiniboine River beginning this year.

That seems to me to be a $10 million per year cost, if we average it out, $1 00 million for 10 years, that will be $10 million per year. I wonder if the Minister is going to tell us whether there are any plans, because this was an election province by the Premier of the Province of Manitoba, that he will be spending that kind of money to clean up the riverbanks.

But then I look and it says, ". . . in cooperation with other departments for public discussion" - I thought that it was already decided," - "public discussion in the near future." I thought it was already decided that this was a promise made by the First Minister and that it would be carried out. lt says, " ... for public discussion." I hope this public discussion won't be the same type of public discussion that The Hazardous Waste Act is going to be. 1901 The Minister has presented a bill and I supported his bill when he presented it, and I hope that it's not just pie in the sky.

I hope the Minister will be able to show us where he is developing it and it's not going to under discussion. I think that it's got to be established

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 and looked after right away, Mr. Chairman. The Minister will have an opportunity of replying to that, as to whether the cleaning up of the riverbanks was just an election prom ise, and whether The Hazardous Waste Management Act is also just an election promise. These are all things that come to mind when I'm going through, Mr. Chairman. Again, it's not my intention to prolong the debate at this point. I'd like to get right into the Estimates and allow the Minister the opportunity of answering some of the questions that I'm prepared to pose to him.

If I've neglected to thank - the Minister took the opportunity to thank his staff - I would like to take the opportunity of thanking my associate, the Member for Portage la Prairie, because we have gone over the Estimates, quite in detail. He's a new member but I'll tell you, when he gets down to asking some questions, you'll find that he's a very very competent member. I would like to thank the Leader of the Conservative Party, now that you're thanking everybody, for his support in my being the Critic of Environment. I would also like to thank my wife for her support. HON. G.

LECUYER: She may not continue to give it to you. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Chairman, I'm being a little bit light and flighty about it, but I would like to thank the Minister for all his cooperation in the past and I hope that we'll have the same type of cooperation once we get right down into the Estimates. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Okay we will now proceed with Resolution 62, deferring Item 1. (

a) Minister's Salary, we'll being with Item 1. (

b) Executive Support. The Minister. HON. G. LECUYER: Just before we begin, I want to introduce the Deputy Minister, Mr. Tom Owen; the Department Administrator for the Executive Supp ort and Finance, Wilt Boehm; and the Director of Environental Management Division, Norm Brandson, are sitting at the tables here. I know that the member has raised in his reply to my opening remarks a number of issues on which he is seeking additional information. As the Chairman has said, we will proceed in the order that this appears on the book.

I will endeavour to comment on all of the specific points which he has raised as we reach these items in the Estimates process, if that is in agreement. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage. MR. E. CONNERY: Mr. Chairman, being a new member, there might be some problems in getting the right thing in the right spot at the right time, so I would hope that if I do miss something, you would give me the opportunity to come back to it, rather than waiting till the Minister's Sal ary, when staff are here. HON. G.

LECUYER: I am quite free in that regard and if we reach some point - I don't encourage to purposely do this - but I understand the member's remarks in that respect; we'll allow it. 1902 MR. CHAIRMAN: I'd like to assure the member, I think we can be flexible as long as they're reasonably pertinent to the items being discussed - you know they'r e not totally out of whack with what we 're discussing, which is Department of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health. Item 1. (

b) Executive Support - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Executive Su pport, this is the group that advises the Minister in all departmental matters, coordinates and manages the activities of the department. Who are these people? HON. G. LECUYER: As I mentioned a moment ago, the director of that

section is Wilt Boehm sitting here at the table. There are a total of eight staff in that section. That is the same number as the previous year. lt includes in the whole

section the Deputy Minister - I'm sorry - we're dealing now with ... MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (b), Executive Support; I assume the member is dealing with 1. (bXa) Salaries. HON. G. LECUYER: Okay, I was starting on the 1. (c). The Executive Suppo rt consists of the deputies and the Minister's immediate staff, such as, the assistants and secretaries. The number is the same as the previous year. MR. CHAIRMAN: I think the member wanted the names of the individuals? MR. A. KOVNATS: I know the name of the Deputy Min ister.

I don't have to have the names of the secretaries - not that I'm belittling their positions - but I'm just wondering whether there would be anybody other than the office staff and the Deputy Minister that would be included in that group? HON. G. LECUYER: There's an executive assistant and a special assistant to the Minister and there's an assistant to the Deputy Minister. MR. A. KOVNATS: Okay, an executive assistant and a special assistant?

Is the special assistant the same position that it was a year ago, and the same with the executive assistant, or have these people been added to the complement under this particular department? HON. G. LECUYER: No, they are the same positions and there was an executive assistant and a special assistant before and that still exists now. MR. A. KOVNATS: The only reason I asked, Mr. Chairman, was there have been many other departments that have increased in executive assistants and special assistants, including the Speaker of the Manitoba Legislature, who didn't have any.

I don't mean to extend, I'm just trying to explain the reason I was asking those particular questions. We can pass that one. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (bX 1)-p ass; 1. (bX2)- pass. 1. (

c) Planning, Research and Evaluation - the Mem ber for Niakwa.

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 MR. A. KOVNATS: This is the group that initiates the policy of the department, the planning of the department on what they're going to do, and it doesn't include the Deputy Minister or the executive assistant or the legislative assistant, this is another group altogether. Can the Minister explain who this group is? HON. G. LECUYER: That is correct, Mr. Chairman. The Planning, Research and Evaluation Branch consists of five staff years under the direction of Gerry Spiegel, the director, and there are three planning program analysts and one administrative secretary.

That is the same number of positions, by the way, Mr. Chairman, as the previous year. MR. A. KOVNATS: Who makes the final decision as to who undertakes the program evaluations in this particular department? Is it the head of this group that you were talking about or is it the Deputy Minister or does it come right back to the Minister to make that decision on the program evaluations? HON. G. LECUYER: That, Mr. Chairman, falls primarily under the Deputy Minister's responsibility. MR. A. KOVNATS: My leader has some questions on this particular . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G.

FILMON: Mr. Chairman, yes, I have a number of questions I want to raise with respect to the topic of acid rain that's referred to in the Minister's opening statement, and I wonder if he'd prefer me to do it here or under Item 2. I may not be available throughout the sitting of the committees. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, could I suggest that we'll accommodate the leader, that we finish 1. (c), and we could interject that comment before we go into 1. (d). MR. G. FILMON: Fine. MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, the Member for Niakawa on 1. (c). MR. A. KOVNATS: Yes, we can pass that one. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 1. (c)( 1)- pass. 1. (c)(2)- pass - the Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could ask the Minister, he made, in his opening statement, the remark that Manitoba is committed to reduce the total provincial sulphur dioxide emissions to no more than 550 kilotons per year by 19 94. What's the maximum emission level of sulphur dioxide that the province has had in its history in one year? HON. G. LECUYER: Could you just hold on a minute; I'll get that information.

I'm not sure whether the Leader of the Opposition is asking what the highest level of emission has ever occurred in Manitoba or what's the current allowable level. If it is the latter, that is the allowable emission level, it's 738 kilotons currently. MR. G. FILMON: And do we have an indication of whether or not that level has ever been achieved in the past or what the maximum level achieved has been? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, I do not have the details of that information. I could get it.

I would have to review, go back a number of years to find out what was the highest level of emission achieved over the past years. I know it was significantly higher than it is presently. In days when, for instance, the whole mining industry, for instance, was operating on more optimum prices for the metal products on the other hand, and as well, because some improvements have been brought about in their operation, specifically in regard to lnco in recent years, so that in itself would have, to a certain extent, already contributed to reductions.

But I can get the figure as far as what might have been, looking back five, six years ago what the highest level was. All I can say is that the level of 738 kilotons over the last seven years has not been exceeded. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Chairman, I recall from previous discussions that the level has not been achieved but it's been my impression, as I think the Minister alluded to, that it's because neither lnco nor HBM and S are operating anywhere near capacity or have been for quite a number of years. HON. G.

LECUYER: Yes, that is part of it, but the fact is that HBM and S is functioning, as I understand it, pretty near capacity. There is a second reason, and I have already alluded to it, and that is also because as far as lnco is concerned there have already been considerable imp rovements brought about in its operation. MR. G. FILMON: I'm aware that lnco undertook the sulphur removal program quite sometime ago and that that has resulted in it. What has been HBM and S and Inca's reaction to the prospect that they would have lower limits placed on them for sulphur dioxide emissions?

Do they believe that they can continue to operate at near capacity and achieve those levels? HON. G. LECUYER: When we initially proposed to live within the commitment of 550 kilotons, this was already on the basis of discussions that had occurred with the industry, and we do believe that it is quite feasible for Manitoba to continue to operate at capacity level down the road at that level of emissions.

We have, as I stated in the preliminary remarks, developed a draft for a preliminary regulation which is now in the process of undergoing further discussion with the industry, and a draft regulation which will be used by the Clean Environment Commission to hold hearings in the communities affected before such regulation is adopted as the mechanism to control the level of emissions by these industries in future years. MR. G. FILMON: Does the 738 kilotons include any allowance for emissions from coal-fired thermal plants at Brandon and Selkirk or any other point locations? 1903

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 HON. G. LECUYER: That 738 includes all sectors, so that's a total for the province, but we, in committing the province to 550 kilotons as the goal for 19 84, which we certainly hope to achieve before that on the basis of the regulations that are now in draft stage, even under the 550 kiloton level, we will have a substantial buffer zone that will be available for other industries or thermal industries, if that should occur. There will be an amount there that will not be allocated to either of these two primary emitters in Manitoba. MR. G.

FILMON: The Minister's opening statement makes the further comment about ongoing research on the effects of acid rain. Has the monitoring shown any noticeable damage due to acid rain in any areas of Manitoba at the present time? HON. G. LECU YER: Mr. Chairman, the ongoing research, and that will continue, has not at this point shown any measurable impacts on the terrestrial or forestry for that matter in the Province of Manitoba. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Has there been any identification of acid rain in Northern Manitoba, or have we set up a system of monitoring Northern Manitoba or areas that are not as accessible as around Winnipeg? HON. G. LECUYER: I missed the beginning of the member's comments, Mr. Chairman. MR. A. KOVNATS: Have we been monitoring the amounts and levels of acid rain in Northern Manitoba, particularly around the area of the Honourable Member for Rupertsland and places similar to that? HON. G. LECUYER : Yes, we certai nly have, Mr. Chairman, we have. Yes indeed, there are five locations where we monitor on an ongoing basis.

By the way, having just used the word, "monitor," and I note that the member used it or commented with that in the opening remarks, when I use the word "monitor," in no way is it equal to looking into. Monitor means "ongoing testing or taking of samples," and that's what I mean when I use the word "monitoring." We continue to monitor. At this point in time, although we know that we do experience some acid rain in Manitoba, we have not been able to notice any of the damaging effects. MR. A. KOVNATS: Could the Honourable Minister advise whether we can identify where this damaging acid rain emanates from? HON. G.

LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, we know, primarily, that emanates from the R2 smelter operations in Manitoba, and some minor effects also that are as a result of operations in Saskatchewan. MR. A. KOVNATS: Under Community Relations it says: "coordinates the communication requirements of special activities such as the U.S. nuclear waste siting issue, hazardous waste mana gement ." Can the Honourable Minister advise whether any locations or any sites have been chosen for the hazardous waste disposal sites? HON. G. LECUYER: The mem ber is referring to hazardous waste or nuclear waste? MR. A.

KOVNATS: I'll start with hazardous waste. HON. G. LECUYER: The process that we are on the verge of embarking into in regard to hazardous wastes - that is the hearings which will occur early this Fall - will have a two-faceted mandate, if I can use that terminology. One would be to provide recommendations in regard to the type of facility appropriate to meet Manitoba's needs; and secondly, to provide the criteria which will be used to proceed then to identify the actual sites. So no site has been chosen at this time.

That can only occur following this final round of Phase One of public hearings, which is going to occur early this Fall. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Chairman, what will the Minister do if there is no encouragement for a site to store or dispose of hazardous waste? HON. G. LECUYER: I assume, when my honourable friend refers to . . MR. A. KOVNATS: No recommendations. HON. G. LECUYER: No recommendations. Perhaps I wasn't clear in my previous response. The hearing process will not recommend sites. The hearings will recommend the criteria which the Crown corporation will use to then identify the sites.

Now, I think the member is also wanting to get to the point. What happens if, based on those criteria, nobody is willing to accept that they are picked as a site or something to that effect? Certainly there will have to be negotiations which will take place. I firmly believe, Mr. Chairman, that

whereas perhaps just a few years back, the attitude of large sectors of the population really were frowned upon and adopted the attitude that it's needed. Yes indeed, it's needed. Everybody agrees that it's needed, but perhaps the traditional attitude was that, it's needed but I don't want it near where I live. That, to a large extent, was based on the fact that nobody had any degree of confidence that we could treat hazardous substances in a way that would render them non-hazardous or non-toxic.

The hazardous waste management system is put in place to do exactly that, to take these substances and render them non-toxic, therefore to provide this degree of confidence that, when they are either finally disposed of in the landfill after they've been chemically treated or if they are incinerated, they will not pose the problem that existed before and that exists now, that these substances are disposed of in the sewage and in the landfill which creates the great problem. I think events in recent years have contributed to changing the mentality.

The PCB incident of last year, for instance, really brought home the point to people in Canada and Manitoba as well that we can't just say, something's got to be done but it better not be done near where I live. Now I think people realize that we're going to have to assume some responsibility, because to not do anything about it creates a much larger 1904

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 problem than if we accept that it has to be done. We accept that it has to be done, as long as it's done in a way that will provide the greatest guarantee in regard to safety for the environ ment and the health of individuals. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm at a bit of a loss, Mr. Chairman. We were in the process of passing the law on hazardous waste and we don't know what we're going to do with it. We've got a law to cover hazardous wastes and now that we've got the law, what are we going to do with it?

I know the Minister is concerned but we still don't have any sites and we're waiting for some committee to make some recommendation so that we can proceed. I think the Honourable Minister has got to make up his mind. He's got to accept the responsibility of being able to make that decision that we will have a site to cover this particular problem, when the act is passed and when it's in motion.

I think the Minister better start thinking about it pretty soon, because we're not too far away from passing this particular bill, and I think the Minister wants it passed, but he's got to give us some answers on some of the results of passing the bill. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, yes, I do indeed accept the fact that we've got to do something about it, and the bill that you're referring to is going to enable us to proceed, certainly a major step forward, in that establishing a Crown corporation we've established a mechanism that is going to look after the operation, the management of this system.

We've reached a point where we cannot continue to operate as a department where we'll be the proponents or the people who are going to run such a system, and at the same time, to be the body that's going to implement and enforce the regulations by which that system has to operate to ensure that it goes on to provide the safety and health of Manitobans and the environment that they live in.

So it will enable us to appoint the board of that commission, the staff that will operate that corporation and they will, in turn, also have to implement decisions based on a great deal of an amount of information that has been provided by the department, has been prepared over the last year by the department, some of which will be submitted for public consumption, and at those hearings.

We have to proceed, but we've learned something from what's happened in other jurisdictions over the years as well, where attempts were made to proceed rather rapidly and that has caused a setback that is perhaps very negative and costly because large sums of money were spent and they were not able to proceed. The proof of that is that no other province has a system in place as yet. Alberta is well on its way to having such a system, is in the process of building it now, and I expect that Manitoba might be, if not the second or third province to have the system in place.

That's how close I think we're getting to having it, and I agree with you; it's necessary. We're committed to doing it, but in a very rational, practical way. To do otherwise simply sets it back longer because it's very important that the public understand what is being proposed and what this will do. In being so informed, they can also have an input in these public hearings. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Now that we've given the Minister something more to think about, I would like to suggest to him that while he's thinking about a site for hazardous waste disposal, he better think about a site for nuclear waste, what we are going to do with the nuclear waste. I know that we're storing nuclear waste at Pinawa and there's nothing wrong with that because I think they're at a particular position of where they have to store that type of waste and we're not bringing in waste from other places. But I was wondering whether the Minister has thought about bringing in a site of nuclear waste.

Let's say that Manitoba is the best site in the world to store nuclear waste, in the Cambrian Shield. Let's say that is the best site in the world to store. Would that change the Minister's attitude towards storing nuclear waste in Manitoba? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, the member is using the word "store." Prior to having said that, he also made the remark that Manitoba is not the province where large amounts of high-level nuclear wastes are used or produced. They're not used as part of our electricity-p roducing facilities which are the major producers of high-level nuclear waste.

The amounts we have now are amounts that have been produced primarily, almost totally, at the research centre in Pinawa and they are stored there. They can continue to be stored there probably for centuries - many, many centuries, at the level they are being produced - without creating any great problem, and it's certainly better being stored there than being disposed of in a permanent way which we know not of, in terms of safety, at this point in time.

Having said that, going onto the other remark made by the member in regard to "if," if it could be shown that this was the safest place in Canada to store nuclear wastes, I don't know how this will ever be shown because, as I said, since we're not the major producers of it, it would mean therefore that these would have to be transported from somewhere else. The transportation of it, in itself, is a factor that certainly can affect environment and safety.

Having said, if Manitoba could be shown to be the safest place, Manitoba is, in very many respects, especially when you're referring to the Canadian Shield portion of Manitoba - well there are other provinces that have much larger surface area of Canadian Shield than Manitoba has - so in this respect if it can be shown that it's highly safe in Manitoba, it can be shown that it's just as highly safe in those other provinces, especially Ontario, which is almost totally covered by the Canadian Shield, and which by the way is the major producer of these wastes.

So if indeed it can be shown that it's safe to be stored in the Canadian Shield, then automatically, it's official, we have shown that it's safe to be stored in Ontario. MR. E. CONNERY: If we're talking about nuclear waste, what is the research that's going on at Pinawa now as the disposal of nuclear waste? There's some activity going on in conjunction with the United States. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, the research that is taking place, in terms of disposal, is taking place at 1905

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 Lac du Bonnet versus Pinawa. Pinawa is a research station but it researches the use of radiation in many, many fields, whether it be in medicine, whether in terms of food conservation or cereal treatment, etc., so that is a station where pure research is taking place.

What is taking place in Lac du Bonnet is an underground research in crystal and rock, to try to determine or to obtain a greater amount of data in terms of how this type of rock formation might be, what we might get in terms of information to be able to evaluate the degree of safety that could be assured if high-level nuclear wastes were disposed of in such vaults underground.

The involvement of the United States in that particular underground research for disposal involves deepening the shaft, so that instead of getting that type of information only at the level which had originally been proposed, we can get the same type of data at double the depth. So they measure, for instance, hydrology, the flow of water, the heat, the reaction of rock under temperature. They will assess, for instance, the faults and cracks in the rocks.

I wish to also clearly put on the record that according to the provisions of the lease under which they operate for 20 years, they are not to use any actual radiation as part of that research underground. As far as the United States' involvement, although there is some form of agreement, this can only be ratified once the federal environmental screening process has taken place and shown that it will not violate the existing lease or create any environmental impacts which would be detrimental to Manitoba. MR. E. CONNERV: Are you saying the American Government isn't participating at this time? HON. G.

LECUVER: Not yet, no. MR. E. CONNERV: Did the Provincial Government lease more land for doing bore hole testing to this same group in the area? HON. G. LECUVER: This does not involve leasing the land. lt's Crown land, which involves a permit or licence, a licence to actually perforate the rock formation in order to study the movement of water underground. MR. E. CONNERV: lt doesn't make sense to me, in any experience I've had, to do testing in an area where you don't plan on having a nuclear storage site.

If they're going to do it in Alberta, wouldn't it make more sense that the research is within their rock formation? I can't see the rock formation being identical. lt just doesn't make logical sense that we'd be doing - I don't mind the research being done if you want to make money doing it, but, logically, the end result would be that there would be a nuclear storage site there. HON. G. LECUVER: The research is part of parallel components of that research also taking place in Ontario, research which has taken place in other spheres in the United States and in other countries of the world.

There are agreements which exist between Canada and these other countries whereby the results of this research will be shared with the participating countries involved. The research is taking place in crystallin e rock formation which you find in the Canadian Shield, and you know, as I do, that that type of rock exists over a large part of Canada and the Northwest Territories; therefore, the information that might be derived could have application elsewhere.

My feeling is that if you have extensively or fully done all that is necessary to carry on your research, including the bore holes, etc., you have probably created sort of a Swiss cheese effect which makes that area unusable for eventual disposal of high-level radiation. MR. E. CONNERV: We were in the acid rain just before we moved completely away from it. We're going to reduce the level to 550 kilotons. What percentage or what purity are we asking our mining companies to go to? Is it a higher purity for the amount of material processed compared to other plants in other parts of the world or North America? HON.

G. LECUVER: I'm not sure that I understand the gist of the question. When you're talking about purity, you're talking the purity of the product? MR. E. CONNER V: For the amoun t of product processed, what amount of emissions can they have? There has to be a correla1ion. HON. G. LECUVER: First of all, let me say that the other provinces of Canada, especially all provinces east of Manitoba, and including Manitoba, are also part of this agreement to reduce emissions.

As far as in terms of the amount, the quantity of emissions is related to the type of ores that you use, and some of it has greater quantity of sulphur even, for instance, in the Thompson area, depending on which site is actually being mined or where the ores actually come from. You have, for instance, the surface pit, which they're now in the process of operating from, versus some of the stuff they get underground, for instance, which will have different percentages of sulphur in it. The process whereby it is removed is in the smelter operation through a pyrrhotite rejection process.

The amount of emissions, therefore, is reduced before it comes out of the stack through these various processes and, to a certain extent, you have to remove more or less depending upon the ore that you're dealing with. I don't know if I've made myself clear on that. MR. E. CONNERV: I know what you're saying, but are we asking for a different purification than other companies in other parts of North America? HON. G. LECUVER: I see.

I can't speak in regards to the United States, but, to a certain extent, it's less restrictive than it is, for instance, in Ontario and Quebec where, for the reason, of course, that they are the ones that are being impacted most presently from their own operation and from acid rain coming from the United States, and have already suffered significant impacts from the past years of deposition of acid rain. Manitoba's emissions and the environment is less sensitive to the level of operation we have.

In a sense, the 550 kilotons that we agreed to will be less restrictive on these operations than it would be, for instance, in Sudbur y, or Noranda in Quebec. 1906

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 MR. A. KOVNATS: I think we could pass this one because we can carry on with the discussion in more detail when we get to Environmental Management. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (d)( 1) - pass; 1. (d)(2)- pass. 1. (

e) Financial and Administrative Services the Member for Niakawa. MR. A. KOVNATS: This one provides financial, personnel and operational support services to the department. Is this the group that collects the fees and the costs and the fines that come with the breaking of the law? Do we have an auditing system that looks after these kind of funds that come into the department? HON. G. LECUYER: The department doesn't collect any fees and prosecutions take place. When they do, thr ough the Attorney- General 's Department, the department itself receives no funding in that regard. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Also this department manages support services such as inventory, vehicles, office space and equipment, telecommunications, word processing services, things of that nature. Does this department do the actual tendering or do they have another department do the tendering for the services that I just mentioned? HON. G.

LECUYER: If the member is referring, for instance, to the various areas that are administered by this section, such as vehicles or equipment or electronic materials or supplies and what not in that regard, that is all done through Government Services, government-wide, and it's not the responsibility of the department to tender for various purchases that are made in this regard. MR. A.

KOVNATS: That pleases me because I know that there's been some discrepancies in tendering practices in other departments rather than in this department and I just wanted to see that this department was following the correct procedure and the responsibility is with Government Services, and I accept that. Feasibility studies: This department undertakes a feasibility study pertaining to word processors and things of that nature. Why would we have that as part of the duties of this department to go through feasibility studies as to word processing systems, computers, electronic typewriters and things of that nature?

Why wouldn't Government Services be the one to look after that because Government Services look after the tendering of other equip ment? Why would this department accept that responsibility, or are we hung up on feasibility studies on all different aspects in this department? HON. G. LECU YER: The fea sibilit y studies or evaluations referred to are strictly internal, for instance, and as a requirement in order to show to be able to justify that, for instance, the purchase of a word processor is required.

I think the member would want us to be conducting evaluations afterwards to determine whether not only we could justify it before it was purchased, but also whether we can justify its use and continue to evaluate the effectiveness of its use once it's in place. When it is not shown that it is cost-effective to continue using a particular piece of equipment in place, the member would not want us to continue to use it as well, but we can only find that out through ongoing evaluation in terms of how beneficial and cost-effective it is to the department to continue its use. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr.

Chairman, can the Minister advise whether there is a particular staff that looks after this particular part of the department, or is it staff that look after this and other duties? HON. E. LECUYER: That falls primarily under the director of the department. There's a total of 16 staff in 198 6-87 in the Financial and Administrative Services Branch and that, by the way, is one less than in the previous fiscal year.

To be more specific, for instance, there's staff - if I just run a few examples, for instance - as well as the director; there's a manager of personnel; there's the coordinator of financial and support services; legal inventory clerk; there's a systems analyst; payroll personnel clerk; word processor operator, etc., etc., as well as the secretarial support staff in that particular section. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm going through a learning process here also, where you have your own payroll, that you manage your own payroll. Who signs the payroll that comes out of your department? HON. G. LECUYER: We do the paper work.

Finance gets to sign the cheques and issue them. MR. A. KOVNATS: Okay, I just wanted to establish that. I think we can pass this . . . MR. E. CONNERY: Is this the department you compare the annual detailed estimates? Is this the department responsible for not having the annual report ready? HON. G. LECUYER: I'm forever looking on who to put the blame. I guess I have to take some of it myself. I'll throw some to my deputy and spread drops of it on to everyone else in the department.

As I said, the difficulties are not altogether difficulties that we could have overcome because of some of the constraints that I've expressed during my opening remarks; some are technical as well. MR. E. CONNERY: I think, Mr. Chairman, the Minister should recognize that this is a very late sitting of the House and any problems that arose should have been overcome in that period of time. I'm sure every different department doesn't undertake fea sibility studies pertaining to word processing systems, computers, electronic typewriters, copying equipment.

If every department had somebody looking at all of these pieces of equipment, to me that is terrifically inefficient. There must be a central clearing warehouse or clearing office that advises on what pieces of equipment to purchase. I find this particular department of 16 people, for what they do, and one of the lines says to process 1907

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 payroll for 290 staff. If you're not on computer, there's something wrong, and staff that are on the same wage when you have to use that sort of a line as to justify what 16 people are doing, I find that this department is pretty thin on work to do. Mr. Chairman, I understand payroll and so forth. HON. G. LECUYER: For the member's information, this is a requirement for every department, not only for ours.

As far as our department is concerned, that particular type of function represents one-quarter of one staff year and, therefore, when you consider, for instance, the costs and the quantity associated with new technology, it's money well spent. Justification that might apply in one department, depending on how it's intended to be used, may not be justification for another department. In that regard, it's a requirement imposed on all departments. MR. E. CONNERY: Is that a new requirement or how long has this requirement been in place? HON. G.

LECUYER: Since I'm Min ister, I know that it's a requirement. lt's about the time that it came into place, so maybe there was a link between the two. As I came in place, maybe they thought that I was going to be one of those that would go overboard, so they passed it on me and everybody else. MR. E. CONNERY: I have found another way to cut the deficit. Thank you. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Chairman, the Minister has advised that the annual report is at the printer as of now.

I wonder whether there's a rough copy that we could see before we close this department, just in case there's something in it that might be pertinent to the investigation of this department. HON. G. LECUYER: I don't know if I said it was at the printer. lt's at the final stage before going there; it's actually at Translation. But in answer to the question the member makes, I have no problem to sit down with the member and go over my scribbled copy of the draft that's gone to Translation. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (eX 1)-p ass; 1. (eX2)- pass. The time being 4:30 p.m. it is time for Private Members' Hour.

I interrupt the proceed ings and will resume at 8:00 p.m. SUPPLY - HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Committee of Supply is now in order. Deferring Item No. 1. (

a) relating to the Minister's Sal ary, the committee's consideration will commence with Item No. 1. (bX 1) Executive Supp ort, Salaries - the Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, we're on 1. (b), I take it? MR. CHAIRMAN: I just announced that we are deferring the Minister's Salary as the last item for consideration, 1908 and we are now on Item 1. (bX1) Executive Support, Salaries - the Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I haven't got my list of SMY's, and I hope my deputy critic might have that with her. I believe it's seven in this line, is it not? MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Yes, correct, the same as last year. MR. D. ORCHARD: Okay. Mr. Chairman, the SMY's and executive support are for the Minister's office and the Deputy Minister's office, and presumably would include secretarial complement. Can the Minister indicate how many special assistants, executive assistants, media assistants which may be part of this seven staff complement? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I have one special assistant, one executive assistant, one administrative support, and four secretaries, and I have no press secretary. MR. D.

ORCHARD: You mean the Minister doesn't have a media communicator that we can vote to remove the salary of, because he doesn't need it and gets good press without it? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I didn't say I didn't need it and I don't know about the good press, but I haven't got one. MR. D. ORCHARD: Can the Minister indicate whether there might be one buried elsewhere in the Department of Health or the Manitoba Health Services Commission? HON. L. DESJARDINS: He or she is well buried, because I haven't found them. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, that is good, Mr. Chairman. Mr.

Chairman, I believe this would be the appropriate place in the Estimates for us to reconcile the amount of dollars that were Special Warranted last year to fulfill the funding obligations of the Department of Health for fiscal year ending March 31, 19 86. Could the Minister provide us with the amount of supplementary in Special Warrant funding? There was just Special Warrant funding, I believe, because there were no Sup plementary Estimates. Could the Minister indicate the value of the Special Warrant that applied to the Department of Health?

If he could give me a breakdown, all I'll need for the time being is a breakdown according to the eight major appropriations as to where the additional funds were earmarked by appropriation. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, of course it's understood we're not dealing with the Commission at this time, just with the department. lt would be only under Continuing Care, Page 88, (gX3) - in other words, it was Home Care - and it's $1.19 79 million. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, what was the total value of the Special Warrant last year?

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 HON. L. DESJARDINS: That's it for the department. I'm not talking about the Commission. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the department's Special Warrant was $1.2 million in rough figures. That means that there was then - okay I'll pose the question. Was there only the one Special Warrant on February 7, 19 86, for $39. 14 77 million? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, no, I'm told that this went in by itself for the department, and my honourable friend is probably referring to a Special Warrant for the Commission that we'll deal with when we reach the Commission.

While I'm on my feet, I've got all the papers here I know you want. MR. D. ORCHARD: What are you going to table? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I just want to give you now, so I won't have to hold it, two copies of each. I've got salary and staffing for the AFM , and I know we're not dealing with that now. I'll give you two copies, one for Bonnie, and the Manitoba Health Services Commission also, the same two things. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, I realize that we're not dealing with the Ma nitoba Health Services Commission, but I would like to - since we're dealing with the Minister's office and he has responsibility for the entire department including the Manitoba Health Services Commission. His Deputy Minister is not only the Deputy Minister of Health, but is Executive Director of the Manitoba Health Services Commission, and his salary is included in here.

I just want to find out if there is only the one Special Warrant to include the whole department, whether it be any one of the first six appropriations or Appropriation 7 or Appropriation 8 related to capital, whether the only Special Warrant that was issued for the Department of Health was in an amount of $39. 14 77 million? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I want to assure my honourable friend that we're not trying to hide anything, but we haven't got this information at this time.

We're justified also, because my honourable friend wanted to talk about the Deputy Minister, and his salary is not here anyway. lt is under the Commission. lt doesn't matter. We'll try to give that to the House and my honourabl e friend, so he can be ready with the information before we start dealing with the Commission, but we can't give it to him today. I want to make sure that we get the question, though. The total Special Warrant in Health, apart from the one we gave you today under the Commission. That would cover it and, if there's anything under the Alcoholism Foundation, we'll get you that too.

Okay, we'll give it to the honourable member as soon as possible so he can have it ready when we start with the Commission. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the Special Warrant in Continuing Care that the Minister indicated, could the staff provide him with the date on which that was passed, and that would let me know whether it was part of the total? Have you got that? You don't have that now? Mr. Chairman, since the Deputy Minister's salary is not here in the $201,0 00 appropriation, is he one of the seven staff positions? HON. L. DESJARDINS: The staff of the Deputy Minister is there, but not the Deputy Minister.

As my friend knows very well, he's also the Executive Director of the Commission, and his salary would be under the Commission as Executive Director. I hope that it doesn't give you an idea of his worth, but I've got a Deputy Minister for nothing. I save a salary. MR. D. ORCHARD: I would never comment that the Deputy Minister was worth what he's getting paid in this appropriation. The Minister might want to. Mr. Chairman, the seven positions that we have here include the support staff in the Minister's office and the Deputy Minister's office.

The area that is curious to me is that, in calculating percentages of increase last year over this year, it's 1.7 percent. If you go to other departments, most of the lines in the Estmates on Salaries are ranging in the neighbourhood of 8 percent where there's no staff change. Has the Minister replaced some staff at a lower salary or, what is the reason for 1. 7 percent here, and over 8 percent in other appropriations? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I think I have the question. The situation here is a little different. You've seen that I got quite an increase; I got quite a promotion from $9, 000 to $20,000 as Minister.

Actually what happened is I was getting half of my salary from Urban Affairs MR. D. ORCHARD: That's not what I'm asking about. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Aye? MR. D. ORCHARD: That's not what I'm asking. HON. L. DESJARDINS: I didn't think you were. You wanted to know why the 1. 7, why the small amount; in fact, it should indicate the other way then. Are you talking only about 1. (

b) now? MR. D. ORCHARD: (b)(1) . HON. L. DESJARDINS: Oh, (b)(1), the Salaries, 197 to 20 1; it's all salaries so I would imagine that there are some people that have been at the top of their bracket, that's the only answer, that ther e's no increment when people are at the top, or they were brought in, no, they are not the highest paid people. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, in our ongoing drive to help this government efficiently spend money, it just stands out as a dramatic example of leadership in the Minister's and the Deputy Minister's offices to have only a 1.7 percent salary increase,

whereas most other lines, for instance, Administration and Financial Services (e)(1) , the salaries are up 8.4 percent, Research and Planning are up 8.1 percent; and you can go through and you find a general trend of 8 percent-plus. That is a significant amount of money in each case, not so much in this particular appropriation, but I was hopeful 1909

Thursday, 17 July, 1986 that there would a reason for the 1. 7 percent that could be emulated in the other appropriations and we would save this Minister a considerable amount of money to put into programming in Mental Health, Continuing Care and the Hospital line. But the Minister seems to be indicating that there is no leadership there; it is a fluke that we are only getting the 1. 7 percent. Well, we just have to accept that. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister ... HON. L. DESJARDINS: You said that, I didn't. I didn't say there was no leadership. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Oh, well the Minister says from his seat that he believes there is tremendous leadership there and that's why he's paying them 1. 7 percent more. Mr. Chairman, can I ask the Minister where Mr. Poushinsky fits into the department? He was recently hired, I believe - I haven't got the date of his hiring - where does Mr. Poushinsky fit into the departmental organization? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, the staff years for Mr. Poushinsky and the analyst will not be found anywhere in here at all. This was something after this was prepared, but the funds will have to be taken from within.

This time we're not asking for additional funds; there won't be any extra requests for funds for the MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the Minister is saying that - and I wish I would have brought that Order in-Council along - but I think Mr. Poushinsky's salary was in the neighbourhood of $60,000 if I remember correctly. Did the Minister indicate that he has some support staff that he will be hiring as well? Did I gather that; two support staff? The Minister is indicating that there will not be any additional funds. They will found, presumably, from some of the vacancies or whatever within the department.

The department is going to have to pick up the funds; they're not going to ask for additional vote. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Right. MR. D. ORCHARD: Can the Minister indicate, then, is Mr. Poushinsky working out of the executive support line through the Deputy in his office or what group is he working out of? HON. L. DESJARDINS: He would be exactly where we'r e at now, in my office. The three staff would be in that office. Mr. Poushinsky did not get an increase in salary; it's a lateral promotion, Senior Officer 3. The analyst is somebody that was seconded from here, and there will be one support staff. MR. D.

ORCHARD: The analyst that was seconded, was that seconded in-house from the Department of Health? HON. L. DESJARDINS: From the Premier's Office. MR. D. ORCHARD: Oh. The Minister indicates that the analyst was seconded from the Premier's Office. Could he indicate who the analyst is? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Yes, Ginny Devine, at my request. MR. D. ORCHARD: Now, Mr. Chairman, the Minister indicates there is not going to be any Special Warrant or any increase in funding for this, it's going to be funded internally within the department.

Could the Minister indicate whether this is viewed by him as a permanent establishment within his office and the Deputy Minister's office, so that next year we might well see an additional three staff allocations to cover Mr. Poushinsky, Ms. Devine and, theoretically, one support staff, in that it will be properly accounted for within the line of the Estimates next year? In other words, it's intended by the Minister to be a permanent position within his department? HON. L.

DESJARDINS: In the sense that you use permanent, yes. lt could be a question of permanent and then redirected somewhere else in a few years, when most of the reforms that we hope will be necessary will be made. Yes, it would have to show there. Now there's two things: either we would have to convince Treasury Board to give us the three staff years, or they would have to be reduced somewhere else. I don't want to mislead; I stand to be corrected. We have the three staff years but we don't have the money, that's the situation.

Next year I guess you'll have to see, we might be in the same position, except the three staff years would be shown - you'd see ten instead of seven, but we might not have any more money. That I don't know, there's no commitment. We'll certainly have money to pay them, but it might be reflected by taking it out of somewhere else. MR. D. ORCHARD: I'm not going to get into semantics of the Estimates book, but that would not be a proper way to show expenditures if you add an additional three ...

I would say that if the Mihister increased his SY's to ten, he would likewise have to increase the budget so it would show. Otherwise, we're shooting in the dark. Mr. Chairman, the Health department is rampant with rumours, of course, as the Minister may or may not know. But would the Minister be contemplating a suggestion that has been bounced around for a number of years of separating the role of Deputy Minister and CEO, or Executive Director of MHSC, and possibly Mr. Poushinsky? We might find him as a Deputy Minister next year with the appropriate salary allocation, and Mr.

Edwards, possibly, as Exec utive Director over at MHSC. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Be ready to debate that when we start the Commission, but I would be the most surprised person in the world if that happens. We have no intentions of that. There's nothing hidden there at all. He was hired to do a certain job and that's what he's going to be asked to do. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, you know, Mr. Chairman, I only mentioned it because it has been bounced around, and I'm pleased with the Minister's response. Mr. Chairman, I think that, for instance, in the Other Expenditures, just a brief question. Does that include 1910

Thursday, 17 Jul

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-1-48a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 1st hansardpdf 48a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	46e2676d2d40e69173204dd0a80a0c3a48a380c0

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