Manitoba Hansard — 16 July 1987 (Sitting 91, 33rd Legislature, 2nd Session)

33-2-91

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Second Session - Thirty- Third Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 36 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable Myma A. Phi/lips Speaker VOL. XXXV No. 91 - 1:30 p.m., THURS DAY, 16 JULY, 1987. Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba ISSN 0542-5 492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Third Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ASHTON, Steve BAKER, Clarence BI RT, Charles T. BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, Hon. John M. CARSTAIRS, Sharon CONNERY, Edward J. COWAN, Hon. Jay CUMMINGS, J. Glen DERKACH, Len DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent L. DOER, Hon. Gary DOLIN, Marty DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert DUCHARME, Gerry ENNS, Harry J. ERNST, Jim EVANS, Hon. Leonard S. FILMON, Gary FIND LAY, Glen M. HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Hon. Harry M. HARAPIAK, Hon. Leonard E. HARPER, Hon. Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon. Maureen JOHNSTON, J.

Frank KOSTYRA, Hon. Eugene KOVNATS, Abe LECUYER, Hon. Gerard MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. AI MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton McCRAE, James C. MERCIER, Q.C., G.M.J. (Gerry) MITCHELSON, Bonnie NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte L. ORCHARD, Donald W. PANKRATZ, Helmut PARASIUK, Hon. Wi lson PAWLEY, Q.C., Hon. Howard R. PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Hon. Myrna A. PLOHMAN, Hon. John ROCAN, C. Denis ROCH, Gilles (Gil) SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Q.C., Hon. Victor SCOTT, Don SMITH, Harvey SMITH, Hon. Muriel STORIE, Hon. Jerry T. URUSKI, Hon. Bill WALDING, D. James WASYLYCIA-LEIS, Hon.

Judy CONSTITUENCY Thompson Lac du Bonnet Fort Garry Minnedosa Rhineland Gimli River Heights Portage la Prairie Churchill Ste. Rose Roblin- Russell St. Boniface Con cord ia Kildonan Arthur Emerson Aiel Lakeside Charleswood Brandon East Tuxedo Virden Kirkfield Park The Pas Swan River Rupertsland Logan Sturgeon Creek Seven Oaks Niakwa Radisson St. James Elmwood Morris Brandon West St. Norbert River East Assiniboia Glad stone Pembina La Verendrye Transcona Selkirk Fort Rouge Wo lseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain Springfield Burrows Rossmere lnkster Ellice Osborne Flin Flon lnterlake St. Vital St.

Johns PARTY NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP NDP PC NDP PC NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP PC PC NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, 16 July, 1987. Time - 1:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER , Hon. M. Phillips: Presen ting Petitions . . . Rea ding and Receivi ng Petitions . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMIT TEES MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Mem ber for Kildonan. MR. M. DOLIN: Madam Speaker, I beg to present the Fourth Report of the Standing Commi ttee on Municipal Affairs. MR. CLERK, W. Remnant: Your committee met on We dne sday , July 14 , 19 87, in Room 255 of the Legislativ e Building to consider bills referred. Your commit tee heard representations on bills as follows: Bill No. 25 - The Discr imina tory Busi ness Practices Act;

Loi sur les pratiques de com merce discrimi natoires Mr. David Matas - Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties Mr. Lyle Smordin - League for Human Rights of B'nai B'rith Bill No. 28 - The High-L evel Radioactive Waste Act;

Loi sur les dechets radioactifs de haute activite Mr. George Ylonen - Private Citizen Mr. Waiter Robbins - Concerned Citizens of Manitoba Dr. William Hancox - Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. Bill No. 65 - The Su rface Rights Act;

Loi sur les droits de surface Mr. Rene McNeill - Manitoba Su rface Rights Association Mr. Phillip Frances - Private Citizen Mr. Adam Turbak - Private Citizen Mr. Rick Brown - Chevron Canada Resou rces Ltd. Mr. Bob Doug las - Keystone Ag ricultur al Producers Inc. Mr. Robert Puchniak - Tundra Oil and Gas Bill No. 68 -

An Act to Govern the Supply of Natural Gas in Manitoba and to amend The Public Utilities Board Act; Loi regissant l'app rovisionnement en gaz naturel du Manitoba et modifiant la

Loi sur la Regie des services publics Mr. Robert Young - TransCanada Pipelines Mr. Craig Frow - Western Gas Marketing Ltd. Mr. Wilf Hudson - Manitoba Federation of Labour Written Submission: Bill No. 25 - The Dis cri mina tory Busine ss Practices Act;

Loi sur les pratiques de com merce discrimi natoires Mr. Israel A. Ludwig - Winn ipeg Jewish Community Council Inc. Your committee has considered: Bill No. 25 - The Discri mi natory Busine ss Practices Act;

Loi sur les pratiques de commerce discrimi natoires Bill No. 28 - The High-L evel Radioactive Waste Act;

Loi sur les dechets radioactifs de haute activite Bill No. 58 -

An Act respect ing the Accountability of Crown Corporations and to amend other Acts in consequence thereof; Loi con cernant !'obligation redditionnelle des corporations de la Couronne et modifiant certaines Lois Bill No. 65 - The Su rface Rights Act;

Loi sur les droits de surface Bill No. 66 -

An Act to amend The Electoral Divisions Act (2); Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les cir conscriptions electorales

(2) Bill No. 68 -

An Act to Govern the Supply of Natural Gas in Manitoba and to amend The Public Utilities Board Act; Loi regissant l'approvisionnement en gaz nature! du Manitoba et modifiant la

Loi sur la Regie des services publics Bill No. 73 -

An Act to continue Brandon Un iversity Fou nda tion; Loi pro rogeant la Fondation de I'U niversite de Brandon And has agreed to report the same with certain amendments. All of which is respectfully submitted. MR. M. DOLIN: I move, seconded by the Member for lnks ter, that the report of the commit tee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPOR TS MADAM SPEAK ER: The Honourable Mi nister of Emplo yment Services and Economic Security. HON. L.

EVANS: Madam Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report of the Workplace Innovation Centre for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1987. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Attorney-General . HON. R. PENNER: Yes, Madam Sp eaker. 3909

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 I beg leave to table the Report of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on the investigation into a number of allegations dealing with MTX, Telecom Services, Saudi Arabian Datacom Limited, AI Bassam Datacom Division, and simply advise the House that I received this at 11 :50 this morning, and would be pleased to answer any questions that might be directed with respect to the report, touching on the legal issues. MADAM SPEAKER: No tices of Mo tion Introduction of Bills . . ORAL QUESTIONS Inter-City Gas - savings to Manitoba consumers MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR.

G. FILMON: Yes, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Premi er. The Premier has con sistently stated that the government takeover of ICG will save the consumers of Manitoba $50 million. Evidence was presented at committee last evening that indicated $32 million of savi ngs would accrue to the consumers of Manitoba as of November 1, 1987, regardless of who owned the natural gas utility in Manitoba. Has the Premier been informed of this? MADAM SPEAKER : The Hono urable Mi nis ter of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Spe aker, I think I'll take that question.

I think that material was put forward by TransCanada Pipelines at some time around 1: 30 in the morning. That information does not correspond to what was presented to the Public Utilities Board by ICG; that does not correspond to any proposals that were put forward to ICG. The date that they indicate that they would make that offer - which has not been formally made - was certainly not October 31, 1987. I wonder if the Leader of the Opposition, who was not at that meeting, was informed of that, Madam Sp eaker. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Spe aker, I wonder further if the Premier has been told tha t both last night's presentation by Western Gas Marketing and TCPL, and the Executive Sum mary of the Report of the Public Utilities Board with respect to natural gas pricing in Manitoba, both confirmed the same blended price as a result of taking into account the discounts that were referred to last night, that would result in the $32 million savi ng. In fact, that same price is confirmed by the Public Utilities Board Report. Has the Premier been informed of that? HON.

YL PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, we had evidence yesterday which clearly indicated that TransCanada Pipelines, for example, was treating the motive fuel tax - which was levied by the government in its Budget of two years ago, which is constitutional, legal - in a different way than they had treated sales tax previousl y levied by this government - sales tax on motive fuel levied by the Government of Saskatchewan - in that those taxes are levied against all consumers of Canada, which adds a price of 1 cent per 1, 000 cubic feet to the cost to consumers.

Ins tead of doing that with respect to the motive fuel tax, the y allocated all of that against Man itoba consumers, which was a radical departure from past polic y. They used that type of number-crunching to come up with the differences that they, in fact, put forward yesterday.

What was not indicated in the presentation that they made is that the discounts applied to the large indus trial or institutional users, and residential families were still going to be charged $3 per 1, 000 cubic feet, which is what they have been charged; and the indications from TCPL's president, when I met with him, were that they did not envisage a lowering of that price in the future, Madam Speak er. So I found a contradiction between what we were told by staff yesterday and what the president of the f Western Gas Marketing Board actually told me, Madam Speaker.

Motive fuel tax - savings to consumers if removed MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, has the Premier been informed that, in fact, the removal of the motive fuel tax on natural gas in Manitoba would result in a further saving of $12 million to the consumers of Manitoba - a tax that does not apply to natural gas in other provinces? Has he been informed that that ' removal would result in a $12 million saving to the consumers of Manitoba? HON.

YL PARASIUK: The motive fuel tax is a tax that is similar to the sales tax that had been applied by the Manitoba Government previously; is similar to the sales tax that is applied presently by the Saskatche wan Government; is similar in category to the diesel fuel tax on locomotives that is levied by Manitoba and Saskatche wan - and I don't see CPR charging a special rate to Manitoba or Saskatchewan farmers because of that tax on motive fuel. < What we find, Madam Speaker, is the Leader of the , Opposition, who is not present at that meeting, getting up and trying to put forward arguments for TransCanada Pipelines when, in fact, their pricing regime has led to a situation where Manitobans are grossly overcharged for natural gas.

And I ask the rhetorical question: Which side are the Conservatives on, on this issue? MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, I'm on the side of the consumers of Manitoba. No question about it. Madam Speaker, my question to the Premier - this is a policy question - in view of the fact that evidence at the committee last night indicated the sa vings of $32 million on available discounts to the people of Manitoba, available as of November 1, regardless of who owns the gas distribution facility, and a further saving of $12 million for the removal of the motive fuel 3910

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 tax that would indicate that the remainder of the $50 million that the Premier says he will save is less than $10 million, is he telling the ratepayers of Manitoba that they should risk a $17 5 million investment on the prospect or the possibility of a potential saving of less than $10 million to have them operate the gas distribution facility in Manitoba? Is that what he's telling Manitobans? HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Sp eak er, I'm qu ite surprised at the Leader of the Opposition, Madam Speak er.

The price that residential families would have to pay under the TransCanada Pipelines system if, in fact, there was not a motive fuel tax, is $2. 79 per thousand cubic feet. The discounts apply to the large industrial users, Madam Speaker -$2. 79; with the motive fuel tax - $3.00. And what we have are people elsewhere, large industrial users, some other users in Ontario, users to the south of us, the United States, paying in the order of $1 .68, $1 .78 Canadian per thousand cubic feet.

Why does the Leader of the Cons ervative Party argue that somehow residential families or small business in Manitoba should be second-class citizens and should not get the same type of gas price as other people, Madam Speaker? Why isn't he backing them instead of the large indus trial users and the big mon opo ly, TransCanada Pipelines? Natural gas - Manitoba consumers offered same price as Mini-gasco MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker , a question to the Minister of Energy and Mines.

Madam Speaker , certainly among the statements made by the Minister, by the First Minister, that has conc erned me and inde ed, I'm sure, many other Manitobans, was the oft repeated statement that American consumers would be allowed or would be put in a position to enjoy lower gas prices for our Canadian gas than is made available to our consumers here in Manitoba. Madam Speaker , at that same committee meeting last night, evidence was presented that Manitoba was indeed offered precisely the same contract that we are tal king about that was offered to the Min i-gasco Corporation in the States.

Can the Minister confirm that? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Mi nister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, I can, in fact, conf irm that the vice-presi dent for TransCanada Pipelines. or Western Gas Marketing, indicated that that had been offered to ICG. In our discussions, we found that no one raised that.

Second ly, when I met with the president of Western Gas Marketing, they clearly informed me that it was not their intention to lower the price from the present package, and they were quite clear in saying that, and 3911 as the presenter has indicated, they would be confirming that with their boss and they would be providing the information that the president of Western Gas Marketing promised to provide me two months ago; namely, that the Americans were paying more for natural gas than Manitobans, when the evidence that we have indica tes that that is not the case.

Yesterday, when the person made his presentation, he indicated, on the one hand, that the gas price in Manitoba was signi ficantly higher; and then, under questio ning, he said it was probably the same; and then he said, well, I'm not sure, it could be a difference because of future considerations.

Madam Speaker, because that was the committee where people are required to present truthful information, and I would hope that the same stand ards apply for people presenting from major corporations as apply to people who present from Crown corporations, that when people are there they do, in fact, present the facts and the truths.

I will await the material that they have promised to send us, Madam Speak er, because we have the information from the producers that were asked by Western Gas Marketing to sign those contracts, which indicates that it's much less than that. lt is those differences, in terms of what TCPL says it offers, and what actually is the case, that has been one of the reasons why we find ourselves in a situation where Manitobans, over the last year, have been paying significantly higher for natural gas than they should have been paying if one took into account the market prices that existed in Canada for natural gas, especially for residential families.

Natural gas - tabling of analysis re prices MR. H. ENNS: Madam Speak er, I don't really wish to engage the Minister in a lengthy debate about who has some of the information or who hasn't got some information. Madam Speaker, we are being asked - and I' m going to have to ask my constituents - to come up with an awful lot of money to acquire a gas compan y. Su rely, we can treat this in a little more mature fashion.

I would ask the Honourable Minister: Will he table the analysis that his department made of the Mini gasco cont ract that was signed by TransC anada Pipelines, or their marketing agency, with the American corporation, so that we don't have this dispute going on here in this House? I can't dispute the Minister's facts, but you have the information, you've done the analysis. Table the analysis and take away this argument. HON. W.

PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, if there is any problem in terms of providing information with respect to gas contracts in the United States, it is a problem that has been created by the Conservative Government of Canada, the Cons ervative Government of Alberta, the Cons ervative Government of Saskatche wan and the Social Credit Government of British Columbia that have said that the prices of contracts to the United States will be kept confidential, that the material will not be made public. That is not the way in which electricity pricing works in this coun try. All of what we have put forward with

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 electricity pricing has been made public. But those prices, according to the Accord that was signed by three producing provinces, conceivably the Federal Government, on behalf of the consuming provinces, provides for secrecy and commercial confidentiality, which is one of the reasons why I did not get into the specifics, but asked for the confirmation of that from Western Gas Marketing . I was being very careful, Madam Speaker , because we are interested , on this side, in ensuring that we do get cheaper gas for Manitobans.

We aren 't going to break anyone 's rules along the way and we will ensure that we move toward getting that cheaper price, despite efforts by people on the other side to undermine that. MR. H. ENNS: All too often we've experienced, throughout this Session, when crowded, blame · the Federa l Government. Now we've added Mr. Vander Zalm in British Columbia, and Alberta and a few others, but that's again beside the point.

It is Manitobans who are going to have to come up with the $100 million to $200 million to buy a gas company, assuring that we have it demonstrated to us that it is a viable economical venture, one that will do what the proponents say it will do - save us many millions of dollars . MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. H. ENNS: I asked two things of the Minister, Madam Speaker . Table us the analysis that his department did on the Mini-gasco contract . Madam Speaker, he just gave me a lengthy answer but dodged the question; dodged the question as he always does .

Secondly, Madam Speaker , I was there last night when the representatives of TransCanada Pipelines gave a commitment to the Minister and to the committee that they would table and they would bring forth the confidential information that the Minister referred to , and I am quite prepared to have it treated that way, but at some point in time, surely those of us who have to make the decision ought to see that information.

And I would seriously ask this Minister to withhold any further action on the bill that was passed at three o'cl ock last night until such time that that information is put before some public inquiry. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker , I received a commitment from the president of Western Gas Marketing Board some time about May 18 that I would be providing that information. It has not been provided yet. The rules of deregulation were established by the Federal Government and the producing province.

We have asked consistently whether Manitoba would be on the monitoring committee to review the prices that are being charged in the United Statess for Canadian gas, and Manitoba has consistently been refused that opportunity by their Conservative colleagues, Madam Speaker. We have indicated that those prices should be made public, and they have indicated that they can 't be, for reasons of commercial confidentiality.

And, Madam Speaker, it is rather interesting that the Conser vatives aren't saying that that should be made open , that there should be an open pricing policy, but rather they are asking a New Democratic Party Government to abrogate that particular agreement that has been established by Conservatives , and it's the agreement that they should find fault with. We will operate within the Accord. And I would imagine what they would have said if Pierre Trudeau had established a system where prices would be secret, where there would be commercially confidential information where people could not release it.

They would be braying, Madam Speaker , but right now they are trying to say that somehow we are the ones, when we have made it ver y clear, over and over again , that those should, in fact , be made public. Inter-City Gas - government obligated to honour contracts MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker , my question is for the Minister of Energy and Mines . Currently, we're being led to believe that the Minister is in negotiations to purchase ICG and establish a new Crown corporation. The alleged savings of $50 million were greatly discrepant.

We may be doing this for as little as $6 million now. Madam Speaker , can I ask the Minister if, in the purchase of ICG, will the new Crown corporation and the government of Manitoba and the people of Manitoba, for that matter, be bound to honour the long term supply contracts that ICG have signed as a company? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker , the legal opinions that we have from across the country ind icate that those contracts expire as of October 31, 1987. What we have done is pursued contracts which precede November 1, 1987.

Madam Speaker, we, in fact, have had TransCanada Pipelines come forward, as they have come forward in the past , with contrary legal opinion. We are confident of our legal position, Madam Speaker, because what we have is a situation where TransCanada Pipelines is not offering market-oriented prices to Manitobans , but is rather using its monopoly position , which was established by Federal Government assistance some 30 years ago, whereby they are the transmitter of natural gas, plus probably the largest marketer and owner of natural gas, to extract what we think are exorbitant prices from the people of Manitoba .

The actions that we are taking , as a whole, as part of an integrated policy, will indeed provide major reductions; and I find it rather strange that we have the Conservatives saying that we'll have few reductions , and we have the Alberta Minister saying that Manitoba's actions .. . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . The Honourable Member for Pembina. 3912

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speak er, of course, you'll indicate to me that I can't enter into debate with the Minister during question period, but debate is certainly deserved because there are other legal opinions on the validity of a long-term contract with ICG. But I won't belabour that point. But given that this Minister seems to indic ate there is no contract as of October 31, 1987, that would tend to confirm what we were told last night, that Manitobans will save $32 million, regardless of who owns ICG, as of October 31, 1987. The $50 million sa vings don't exist.

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? Inter-City Gas - risk not worth savings MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speak er, a very simple question to the Premi er, and surely this Premier who leads this govern ment can answer this simple question. Is the First Minister willing to risk $18 0 million of Man itoba mo ney while he's closing hospital beds throughout this province for as little as $6 million of savi ngs to the consumers of Manitoba, when his Minister has confirmed cont racts don't exist, savings will automatically incur, regardless of ownership of ICG this fall?

Is the Premier willing to risk $18 0 million and close hospital beds for as little as $6 million? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, it would be helpful in this Chamber if honour able members, when they do present qu es tions - and often we do get very cons tructive questions - but attempt to ensure that they succeed in getting their facts straight when they ask those questions. The reference to hospital beds, the reference to other items on the part of the Member for Pembina is again the kind of gamemanship that we see from time to time across the way.

Madam Speaker, if we fail to demons trate the strength and conviction to proceed on behalf of Manitoba consumers, if we assume an indifferent attitude or a timid attitude or an attitude that is submis sive to the powerful interests that may oppose this legislation, then, Madam Speaker , there is no way that we can realize savings for ordina ry consumers in the Province of Manitoba. Immigration - federal funding re Meech Lake Accord MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speak er. My question is to the Premier.

In the Me ech Lake Cons titutional Accord, an immi gration commitment was given to the Province of Quebec. Specifically , the Accord

preamble states that Quebec will get 28 percent of all immigrants to this country and a possibility of an additional 5 percent. 3913 I would ask the Premier if this im plie s also a commitment for similar proportions of federal funding to the province for other purposes such as job creation, economic growth or social services; and would this limit Manitoba to 3.85 percent of both immigration and potential funding? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, the question is a good one.

Certainly, ins ofar as committing the province to a particular percentage of job funding or any other Federal Government initiative, no, there's nothing of course in the Meech Lake Accord that commits the funding at the federal level to a particular percentage level, including the Province of Manitoba. That is a matter that must be dealt with in the political forum, as indeed it will be, come the next election, because of the way that many provinces, including provinces in the West, in Atlantic Canada, have been dealt with.

Insofar as the immigration question, the member raises a question that I belie ve requires a serious response and I will take that question as notice, and if I'm unable to get back to the honourable member with an answer prior to the conclusion of the Session, I will correspond with her. Charter of Rights - supreme law MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker, a supplem entary question to the First Minister.

Has the Minister received any reassurances by way of letter or public statement from either the Prime Minister or the other nine Premiers since the Langevin meeting, that the Charter of Rights remains the supreme law of the land in light of the Accord's provisions, or has the derogation clause in

section 16 of the Accord weakened the Charter as the fundamental law of Canada? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Madam Speaker, that matter was very carefully canvassed throughout the course of the meetings in the Langevin block and was addressed by a number of constitutional experts, and the very specific wording of the non-derogation clause at the end of the agreement is worded in such a way that it is clear that the Charter, in fact, is still, together with the Constitution as a whole, the supreme law of the land. Constitutional Amendment - public hearings MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: A final suppleme ntary to the Premier, please, Madam Speaker. The date of the federal hearings of the Accord have been set. They will take place only in the City of Ottawa and they will take place only in the months of July and August. Can the Premier tell us when we can expect hearings which will take place throughout Manitoba on the provisions of the Accord?

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speak er, let me just add my voice to the disappointment that the hearings are restricted to Ottawa, that they're restricted to the month of August, and I gather there's some prescre ening, which has never taken place, by the way, in this Legislative Assem bly , ins ofar as permitting certain people to make presentations. I have never seen that occur, certainly at our level, on the part of this government, limiting the number of presentations by way of prescre ening.

Madam Speak er, insofar as the second question posed by the Member for River Heights, that is a matter that I believe we must have further discussions involving the Member for River Heights, the Leader of the Opposition and myself as to the exact timing of those hearings at the provincial level. Inter-City Gas - savings to Manitoba consumers MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Roblin- Russell. MR. L. DERKACH: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

My question is to the Minister responsible for Crown Investments, the Minister who is responsible for all Crown corporations, for their accountability and for the formation of new Crown corporations, as well. Last night, Madam Speaker , we heard evidence from presenters at comm ittee hearings on the natural gas bill that showed some marked evidence that was different from what has been presented in this House by the Minister of Energy and Mines.

My question to the Ministe r who is responsible for Crown Investments is this: Has he had sufficient evidence from the Department of Energy and Mines which clearly shows that Manitobans will experience marked savi ngs and benefits from the takeover of Inter City Gas? MADAM SPEAKER : The Ho nour able Mi nister of Energy and Mines. HON. W.

PARASIUK: Madam Speaker , the interesting thing about the Conservatives is they failed to realize over the last month or so that what we have is an integrated policy of long-term contracts, at good prices, at the pursuit of gas purchases, of gas reserves, which would be available at very good prices, which would enable us to have security of supply into the long-term future; that we are looking at fair distribution costs, and we are also looking at examining the feasibility of extending natural gas access to many more Manitoba communities and many more Manitobans. lt is that package, Madam Speaker , that we have put forward, whereby we indicate that residential families, who are presently being charged $3 per thousand cubic feet, could find thems elves in a situation where they are being charged less than $2 on a wholesale basis for natural gas.

And, Madam Speaker, to have the Cons ervatives on the other side come along and say, oh, well, people are promising things for the future which they never delivered in the past is to make them apologists, sadly make them apologists . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Order. The Honourable Member for Robli n-Russell . MR. L. DERKACH: Madam Speaker, it is deplorable to see the fashion in which this Minister and this government conducts itself. MADAM SPEAKER: . . . with a question. Inter-City Gas - legal position of province re long-term contracts MR. L.

DERKACH: My question, Madam Speaker, was to the Mini ster of Crown In vest ments who has repeatedly stood up in this House and said that he will make sure that Crown corporations are accountable to this Assembly and to the people of this province. My question to the Minister of Crown Investments now is whether he has investigated Manitoba's legal position with regard to the long-term contracts that we are now in with Inter-City Gas? HON. W. PARASIUK: As Minister responsible for that � area, I will be answering that question. � We have, in fact, had the legal opinion done, Madam Speak er.

They indicate that the contract position expires as of October 31, 19 87 and, Madam Speaker, we will be involved possibly in a court case. Our legal opinions will, in fact, be kept for a possible court case, but I can assure the member that they exist.

I'm surprised that people on the Opposition side someho w would be so concerned about protecting TransCanada Pipelines' position and turning their backs on the fact that the Public Utilities Board did rule that natural gas prices in Manitoba were excessive and discrimina tory, Madam Speaker, and said that the market range of natural gas was probably in the order of $1 .99. Where were they when that was being done, Madam Speaker? Minister of Community Services - request for resignation MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

My ) question is to the First Minister. Yesterday we received the report on the infant death , of Baby Desiree. We have now had many reports, all of them highly crit ical and condem ning of the Department of Commun ity Services. Condemnation for lack of training, lack of commu nication between agencies and lack of direction by the present Minister. Because of this, a number of infant deaths have occurred, six in the last year. This Minister has had four years to organize this department and instead of improvements, we see further deterioration of this department on a daily basis.

When will the First Minister replace the present Minister? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I've never before heard it suggested that a Minister be replaced or anyone 3914

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 else be replaced who is attempting to identify and to deal with problems in a constructive way, in a way that was not done for the century prior to four years ago. Madam Speaker, rather than ask for this Minister's resi gnation, honour able members should be saying, thank goodness there is a Minister who, final ly, after decades and decades, is attempting to deal with a long-time problem in the Province of Manitoba. She should be commended and not condemned. MR. A. BROWN: My question is to the First Minister again. How many more needless deaths will have to occur?

How many more children will have to suffer placements in unacceptable foster homes? Ho w many more childr en will have to be placed in institutions where sexual abuse has occurred before this Minister will be removed from office? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, there will be more identification, there will be more attempt to analyse the cause of those deaths as a result of this Minister in order to ensure the minimization of such deaths in the future.

Madam Speaker, such effort should have been undertaken years ago and at least this Minister is making significant strides in tackling a problem that has been long overdue. Madam Speak er, if you do nothing, if you stand still, no one is going to criticize. This Minister has been prepared to move forward and to make changes, to identify, to analyze and to minimize as a result of her efforts. Madam Speak er, again, I say to the member; surely , he's not suggesting that someone be condemned because they are trying to make improvements that should have been made decades ago in this province.

Child and Family Services - improvement in standard of service MR. A. BROWN: My question is to the same Minister - the First Minister. The present Mini ster of Commun ity Services destroyed a system which was operating much better than the present system. She has now had four years in which to correct the mistakes that have been made.

If the First Minister will not replace the Minister of Commu nity Services, will the Mi nister personally intervene and make certain that unacceptable practices cease and proper training and proper directives to workers, proper coordination between agencies, will be implemented so that more needless tragedies can be avoided? HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , certainly the sugg estions by the Member for Rhi neland are con structive, but I need say little to him except that he's somewhat overdue in his request, because this Minister has been attempting to do that, and has been successfull y, in an effort to improve what has been a bad situation for decades and decades - in fact, since the beginning of the histor y of this province. Madam Speaker, it is already being done. 3915 Universities - details of funding MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I'm rising to respond to a question that was raised by the Member for Fort Garry some weeks ago with respect to when I would be informing the universities of the additional suppor t that they might expect as a result of requests from the universities. I am pleased to advise the Member for Fort Garry that I have just written to the universities indicating that the government will be providing an additional $1.2 million in operating suppor t this year, in recognition of the fact that there are increased operating costs.

Madam Speaker, this additional $1. 2 million brings to a total $8.7 million that's been provided to universities in operating grants this year - a total of 5.3 percent increase year over year. I know the Member for Fort Garry has been interested in when that additional support would be forthcom ing. lt is on its way. Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba - Western Region admin. office closed MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Madam Speak er, I have a question for the Minister of Health.

I am in receipt of a letter sent to the Board of Governors of the Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba in which they indicate to the Board of Governors - and this is from the western regional director of that association - indicating that the government forced the decision upon the Board of Governors of the Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba to close the adminis trative office in Brandon. Is that correct? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Mi nister of He alth. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Ma dam Spe ake r, the government did not force any decision.

As the members of this House should know, the AFM gets all these funds from the government. They've had to stay within - like every department - they've had to stay within the allotted funds. There has been some discussion and the discussions are ongoing, to try to make sure that all the services are delivered and also to try not to centralize. I've had discussions with the executive director of the AFM. Those are ongoing and if there is any decision it should be announced fairly soon. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Madam Speak er, is the Minister of Health telling us that in this letter, that this statement is not correct, that "Judge Rubin advised us ... " being the Western Region of the AFM, Madam Speaker - "this move was forced upon the AFM by the Provincial Government." Is he indicating that statement by Judge Rubin is not true? MADAM SPEAKER: May I point out to the Ho nourable Member for Arthur, Beauchesne 362, which says, "lt

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 is not good parliamen tary practice to commun icate written allegations to the House and then to ask Ministers either to confirm or deny them. 1t is the Member's duty to ascertain the truth of any statement before he brings it to the attention of Parliament." Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba - government funding MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Arthur. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Madam Sp eaker, in view of the fact that the Alcoholism Foundation of Manitoba - and alcohol and drug abuse is a major concern in our soci ety, and the work that is being done in that area is a major preventative program and has been cut by this province, Madam Speaker - I ask the Minister of Health: Will he reconsider his decision to direct them to cut the staff in the West man Region and give them enough funds to carry out a worthwhile, meaningful program ins tead of buyi ng a gas company that's questionable at best as to the profits it will make for this province? SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON.

L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker , at no time did I ever give any direction to Judge Rubin or anybody else to cut anybody, anywhere. As far as the discussion in working with the AFM, I just finished telling you that is being done. We are looking at the concern of the AFM. Remember that that statement was made -(Interjection)- I beg your pardon? What are you sayi ng? Wel l, I thought I was. Madam Speaker, I have said that there's discussion ongoing with the AFM and that will continue.

With one thing in mind, to spend the money wisely, remembering also the admonition from the members of this side of the House telling us that the deficit is too high, that we should be very careful, that the taxes are too high and so on. And then the large interest, the big interest on the ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The time for Oral Questions has expired. The Honourable Opposition House Leader. MR. G.

MERCIER: Madam Speaker, as the business of the House appears to be winding down - when, I can't guarantee - and in view of the fact that we have two more members on this side that were slated to ask questions, I would ask the Government House Leader whether they would grant leave for the Member for La Verendrye and the Member for Turtle Mountain to ask questions and then we'll complete question period? MADAM SPEAKER: Is that agreed? (Agreed) Fisher, Ross - hired by Co-op Development, salary of MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. H. PANK RATZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

My question is to the Minis ter of Co-op Developments. The only thing is he doesn't know the ques tion. Would the Minis ter inform the House if his former politic al executive assistant, Ross Fisher, who was in Thompson and who is known in his department as "the spy," has now been or will be hired on a term con tract in this department? And if so, what will he be doing and what will his annual salary be? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Co op Development HON. J. COWAN: I wasn't certain; as a matter of fact, I have to admit I had not heard him referred to in that terminology previousl y.

So I can't comment on what he is known or isn't know as in the department, but he is indeed working for the department upon the recommendation of the Deputy Minister and staff on a term contract dealing with the Development of Youth Employment Cooperatives, which is in fact an initiative of the department for this year to provide employment for young Manitobans through the Devel opment of Youth Cooperatives.

We discussed the matter briefly in the Estimates process, and at that time, I indicated that we were embarked upon a pilot project which we hope will result not only in employment for young people in Manitoba which is one of the priorities of this government, but, as well, will result in young people participating in the prog ram , gaining a better understan ding of ho w cooperation makes this province a stronger province through working with existing cooperatives. So he is indeed working on that project lt is a term project for six months. I'm not certain of the salary.

I can report that back to the Member for La Verendrye, but it is certainly in keeping with salaries that are paid for those positions in a normal fashion and is not out of the ordina ry in any respect I have to tell you, Madam Speaker, that the project, the pilot project, is in fact succeed ing, it is in fact employing young Manitobans, it is in fact creating jobs for Manitoba youth, and it is in fact building a stronger cooperative movement in Manitoba. So we're quite pleased with the work that he's been able to undertake. Bailey, Ron - appointed to position in Co-op Development MR. H.

PANK RATZ: Madam Speaker, to the same Minister. Will the Minister inform the House as to whether or not a Mr. Ron Baile y, the campaign manager for the NDP Member of Parliament, Bill Blaikie, has been appointed as manage r in his depar tment, notwithstanding there were over 100 applicants for the position, many with more seniori ty, experience and qualifications, and what will his annual salary be? HON. J. COWAN: it's interesting that the question is coming forward now, because when I assumed the portfolio, Mr. Bailey was working for the department, doing a very good job then, doing a very good job now.

I've had the portfolio for three or four years now, and he has, during the course of that tenure, done an efficient job in his capacity with the department 3916

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 Madam Speaker, he was previously responsible for commu nicating with cooperatives on how we can build a stronger cooperative movement in Manitoba and liaising with those co-ops.

I think the fact that in the last three years we've had record levels of the corporations and new co-ops in Manitoba, very clearly indicates at least he and the rest of the department, no matter where they might have been employed previous ly, are doing an excellent job in making Manitoba's cooperatives aware of what this government can pr ovide to them by way of assistance, and also feeding back to the government the concerns and the aspirations of the cooperative sector. He was hired on the basis of a bulletin application. There was, in fact, a full review; the normal Civil Service procedures were followed.

There were a large number of applicants. He was the winning applicant, and that does not mean that there weren't other good applicants; but on the basis of the review panel and in the review panel's opinion alone - not that others don't share it, l but they were the ones who made the decision - he , was the best qualified applicant, Madam Speaker, and I hope all mem bers will wish him luck in making the department work better on behalf of all of Manitoba's 330,000 and 250,000 cooperators. Dept. of Co-op Development - low morale due to appointments MR. H.

PANKRATZ: Madam Speaker, it's obvious, after leave, there's now no time limit to the response to the questions. Madam Speaker, in view of the partisan political appointments, would the Minister inform the House as to what steps he will take to overcome the bad morale in his department which these appointments have created? HON. J. COWAN: First, Madam Speaker, let me reject the premise. They were not political appointments. They were appointments made on the basis of merit. Let me talk about morale for one moment, Madam Speak er. Morale in a department is bad when the department can't do its job well.

In 198 0, when one co-op in the Province of Manitoba was incorporated; in 1981, when three or five co-ops in Manitoba were incorporated; last year, over 60 coop eratives - a new record that most cooperatives incorpor ated in a single year since records were kept - were incor porated in the Province of Manitoba, not only does that create good morale in the department, and there is good morale because they're doing their job well and they're doing their job better than ever done before - all of them are work ing together - but, more importantly, Madam Speaker, that creates good morale among the cooperative mo vement in Mani toba, which is an extremely important sector in our economy.

And if they suggest that the appointments that we're making are creating that sort of a situation, then I want to make many more of those kinds of appointments in the future. Careerstart - funding denied to Teen-Aid MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. D. ROCAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minis ter responsible for Employment Services and Economic Security.

Given that the Wi nnip eg Gay Le sbian Youth Organization's coordinator is receiving a grant through the Careerstart Program, can the Minis ter explain to the House why an organization by the name of Teen Aid, a non-profit organization which teaches family life and sex education through abstinence, who also met the Careerstart criteria, were denied funding under this program? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minis ter of Employment Services and Economic Securi ty. HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, as I indicated the other day, we have a system for approval.

The staff receives thousands of applications and thousands of young Manitobans are gi ven jobs in worthwh ile endeavours. I might add, Madam Speak er, for the member . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, if the Member for Arthur could contain hims elf, I'd like to indicate, since the Member for Turtle Mountain raised it, I've got some figures on where are we spending all this money and how many people are we helping. Do you know, Madam Speaker, that 5,679 young people got jobs under this program this year?

Six hundr ed and forty-four in agriculture and related indus tries; 346 in manufacturing; 324 in construc tion; 853 in retail trade; 571 in universities, li braries, museums and archives; 594 in hospitals, health services, including nursing homes, child welfare services; 557 in hotels, motels, restaurants, and so forth and so on.

Madam Speak er, in the memb er's own rid ing, Boissevai n, we have the Beckoning Hills Museum; in Arthur, Melita and area, personal care homes; the Reston District Library; the Society for Manitobans with Disabilities; the Canadian Mental Health Associa tion; the MacGregor Personal Care Home . . . Careerstart - review and approve funding for Teen-Aid MR. D. ROCAN: Madam Speaker, a final supplementary question. I hear mem bers across the way say, "Hit him again." But, Madam Speaker, my question to that Minister: Why the double standard?

We 've got more kids out there, and sur ely this Minister believes in fairness and equity. Therefore, I ask him: Would he ins truct his staff to review and approve the application presented by the Teen-Aid organi zation under the Careerstart Program? Wo uld he approve it? SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker , in the interest of efficiency - the mem bers opposite would like to hear this - and federal-provincial cooperation, the member should know that we have a system in place whereby we check with the Federal Department of Employment 3917

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 and Imm igration under Challenge '87, and we trade off every application that comes in to make sure that if they did get some federal mo ney, they should n' t necessarily get some provincial money, and vice versa. I dare say - I'm not sure - but I wouldn't be surprised, Madam Speaker , that this may be the case in this ins tance.

Ma dam Speaker, let it be on the record that thousands up on thousands of worthwhile social programs, hundreds of projects, including for children, that the member is concerned about, for the old people in the nursing homes, for people in the universities, for people working in indus try and small business, that there are thousands of young people, 5,679 jobs out there and that member has to single out one that may or may not have been proved properly.

Madam Speak er, the fact is that we do have a procedure that's fair and that indeed has provided jobs and employment opportunities for the young people in this province and they appreciate what we are doing, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAK ER : The Hon ourable Min ister of Indu stry, Trade and Technology. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Could I have leave to revert to tabling of reports? MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed) MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS (Cont'

d) MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Minister of Indus try, Trade and Technol ogy. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. 1 would like to table the 19 86-87 Annual Report of the Manitoba Research Council. HOUSE BUSINESS MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Yes, Madam Speaker, on a matter of House business, I wonder if I could just ask whether the Attorney-General would be available during the consideration of the Capital Bill at commit tee stage to respond to questions about the RCMP report into MTX. HON. R. PENNER: At your services.

ORDERS OF THE DAY MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Yes, Madam Speaker, would you please call Second Reading on Bills No. 51 and 53 in the order in which they appear? MADAM SPEAKER: Debate on . HOUSE BUSINESS MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Opposition House Leader. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I wonder, just on a matter of Ho use business, whether the Government House Leader would confirm that after adjournment of the House at six o'clcock, we will resume at 8:00 p.m. tonight. HON. J. COWAN: That would certainly be agreeable.

MADAM SPEAKER: May I ask the Honou rable Government House Leader to clarify if he is se eking leave for that, or is that something that he plans to do later? HON. J. COWAN: it's on leave. MADAM SPEAKER: Is there leave then to resume at 8:00 p.m. tonight? (Agreed) ADJOURNED DEBATE ON SECOND READING BILL NO. 51 - STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT (TAXATION) ACT, 1987 MADAM SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Finance, Bill No. 51, standing in the name of the Honour able Member for Pembina. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, we'll get into comm ittee stage shortly on these and several other bills, and at that stage of the game, I would then prefer to make a number of comments which apply to a number of areas of government. So, Madam Speaker, unless there's no further debate on this, commi ttee stage could proceed. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. BILL NO. 53 - THE OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION TAX ACT MADAM SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Finance, Bill No. 53, standing in the name of the Hono urable Member for Morris. MR. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker, I don't intend to speak too long on Bill No. 53; although I must confess, in reading the very detailed explanation of the bill as presented, I still, quite frankly, don't have a strong understanding of what it is the government is attempting to do. Madam Speaker, the former Oil and Natural Gas Tax Act, which is being repealed and being replaced with this new act, brought forward taxation.

The purpose of that act, and I quote, as I was able to find in this document, was "to levy tax on producing areas, on the ownership of minerals, on land producing oil or gas." Madam Speaker, the current rates apply to monthly production values ranging from 6 to 275 mills 3918

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 on developed wells, 2 to 125 mills on new wells, and I take it it's 1 to 58 mills on new wells during the incentive period. Now, Madam Speaker , I may have incorrectly have read that. To the best of our abili ty, in having asked people in the industry whether they are supportive of this new act, we have been unable to determine whether or not there's any major concern with it.

So on that basis then, we are prepared to see it m ove forward into Comm ittee of the Whole ; although I would ask the Minister maybe, in wrapping up debate, for a broader explanation of freehold rights; also, maybe give us some ind ication as to how they were going to be taxed specifically under this new act. Madam Speaker, it seems to us that the removal of a signi ficant number of assessment and tax notices against mineral-right holders, that has been used as one of the reasons for the advent of the new act. lt seems to be most supportable, Madam Speaker.

Yet I kno w there are probably going to be amendments that are brought forward that will make the definition with respect to some of these areas a little bit more meaningful. But I would hope that the Minister, in closing debate on Second Reading, Madam Speak er, would address two or three questions. First of all, tell us specifically what is meant by freehold oil and gas rates and how they are to be taxed within this bill. Second ly, explain why it is that such a significant portion of this bill, pages 7 to 19, deals with admin istration and enforcement.

Madam Speak er, ful ly, 12 pages are directed almost to enforcement. I looked at the old bill, Madam Speaker, and I didn't see a very heavy emphasis on this area. I would ask the Minister again to explain why it is that it's necessary to have all these provisions dealing with the area of enforcement. The

section is also titled. "administration," but I dare say, Madam Speaker, when one reviews the bill, it's exclusiv ely, for the most part, directed towards enforcement. Madam Speaker, I'm well aware that revenues through the application of this act have fallen over the last couple of years. lt seems to me they've come down from $14 million to $7 million. I think they were the high in 1985 of 14 .7. This past fiscal year, their estimated revenue was to be 7, and I think, in the year that we are now standing, it's also more or less within that range.

The government, as they like to do on other issues, Madam Speaker , like to reserve the right to regulation - to impo se a numb er of revenue measures and applications. I really can't, at this point, contemp late what major chan ges in regulations will flow as a result of the passing of this act.

But, Madam Speak er, let me say, in closing, that our party is suppor tive of the bill in principle, given two things: given the explanation of the sponsoring Minis ters; and, secondly , being unable at this point to determine, in the feedback that we've received from only a few mem bers within the industry, that they them selves have any great concern with the implementation of the new act before us. Thank you. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, we will be going into Second Reading and then going into comm ittee.

I would ask some indulgence from the member with respect to the question on freehold taxes just so I could check some notes on that. But I would say that this bill has indeed been developed after a great deal of consultation with people in the industry. That has taken place over a period of time with my Director of Petroleu m, Clare Moster, and the industry, over a period of time, to try and put together a system that would be closer in line with the Saskatchewan system, which allows for regulation, and provide for fle xibility with respect to particular wells.

We have a set of programs in place where one classifies wells one way - we had discussions with the companies in that respect. I think the process that has basically taken place at the technical level, when I met with members of the indus try in Manitoba, they in fact indicated to me that they were supportiv e of the bill. They were pleased with it, and since I did not get any negative response from them, I put it forward on that basis. But I would like some indulgence from the member so I could go and check some notes with respect to the question of freehold taxes, because we have two ways of taxing.

One is a freehold tax which is levied, and the other on Crown land is done through sale of Crown leases and through a royalty system which we, in fact, can put on Crown land. So there is that difference. There is some space there, obvio usly, which is, in a sense, the mineral royalalty that goes to the freehold owner of that mineral lease. But roughly speaking, the total amount of Crown royalty and oil tax is equal to the amount of individual royalty gained by an individual royalty-freehold owner of the mineral right and the Crown's amount. So you don't have two systems of taxation, roughly speaking.

That's the general principle on which that operates and I think that, all told, we've tried to make our system com petitive, taking into acco unt our parti cular circumstances in Manitoba vis-a-vis Saskatchewan and Alberta. We don't see ourselves, in a sense, as price leaders here. We see ourselves as, in a sense, coming in as price followers. We don't see ourselves, with oil, necessarily as being, in a sense, a regulation or admin istration centres. We tend to see ourselves as being adminis tration and regulation followers in this particular area, taking into account the particular circumstances in Manitoba.

That's the general answer. If the member wishes, I can try and find the other information. I apologize for not having anything more specific. I thought that possibly when we had gone through Estimates, we might have gone through some of these items. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J.

COWAN: Yes, Madam Speaker , I move, seconded by the Mi nis ter of In dustry Trade and Technolo gy, that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to continue to consider and report of Bills No. 51, 52, 53 and 56, for Third Reading. 3919

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 MOTION presented and carried and the Hous e resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole to continue to consider and report of bills for Third Reading, with the Honourable Member for Bu rrows in the Ch air. COMMIT TEE OF THE WHOLE MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Commit tee of the Whole House, please come to order to consider Bills No. 51, 52, 53 and 56, and to continue considerations of Bill No. 57. Is it the will of the commi ttee to proceed in the order thus named? (Agreed) BILL NO. 51 -STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT (TAXATION) ACT, 1987 MR.

CHAIRMAN: Bill No. 51 -does the Minister have an opening statement? HON. E. KO STYRA: Thank you, Mr. Chair of Commit tees. I won't provide any extensive comments, because I did provide detailed comm ittee review notes for the mem ber a considerable time ago, at the time of introduction of Second Reading of this bill, which was over a month ago. I did provide the member with that information, so I won't bother reading it all into the record. I would also point out that I did supply the memb er with a proposed amendment, which I intend to bring forward when we get to the appropria te sec tion of the bill. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Does the Opp osition critic, the Honourable Member for Morris, have any statement to make? MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, jus t a very brief one, that being we're talking about, of course, the main taxation measures that were brought forward in the Budget, again it's incumbent upon the Opposition to request of this government, particularly the Minister of Finance, some indication at this point in time as to how the revenues are flow ing, basis the changes in the taxes that we're giving effect to today. Also, Mr.

Chairman, it's important that we realize that, at this point in time, Manitobans are enraged at a level that they've never been, not only because of Bill 47 and other bills this government has brought forward, but specifically within every household where a wage payment is taken because of the net income tax, the flat tax on an income. Mr. Chairman, I know the Minister is receiving daily letters on this one item alone. I think, as we said some three months ago when the Budget came down, that over time Manitobans would come to the realization as to what would occur. That has now happened. So, Mr.

Chairman, I don't have the time to belabour and present another Budget presentation or speech. I don't want to. But I would ask the Minister how he will be monitoring two things: firstly, the revenue in flows, because we're already three and a half months into the new fiscal year; and, second ly, is he also monitoring th� number of busine sses at this point in time which are reducing their payroll or some of them even moving out of the province?

So that at that six month statement of the fiscal standing, we won't, all of a sudden, be shocked to learn of the news, as we were a year ago, that we had a budgetary shortfall far above the forecasted level. HON. E. KOSTYRA: I will not take the provocation to get into the Budget Debate over again at this point. We may well do that before this Session concludes, but let me just answer specifically the questions raised.

At this point, we have not seen the information for the first quarter of the year, and as I indicated in a response to a question the other day from the mem ber, that will be provided in the usual fashion as soon as it's available. I have asked staff as to what has been happening with respect to revenues, and the first three months are not in. We do have indications of the first couple of months, and that indicates at that point in time that things are at or actually beyond overall targets.

I did indic ate when we were dealing with another matter - I can't recall the day or the context - but the only area of revenue that was, at this point, seen to be below target was in the area of tobacco revenue. The others are at or close to or beyond that which was projected. But we'll certainly be looking at that when we get the first qu arter rec oncil iation of revenues and expenditures, and it's certainly our intent to ensure that we remain on target not only in terms of revenues but in terms of expenditures. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it the will of the comm ittee to consider ... HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Well, then, I'll have to make my amendment. MR. CHAIRMAN: . clause by clause, page by page? HON. E. KOSTYRA: I think we should actually do it page by page so that I can move my amendment. MR. CHAIRMAN: Pages 1 to 27, inclusive, were each read and passed. Page 28 -the Honourable Minister. HON. E. KOSTYRA: I move, seconded by the Minister of Indus try, Trade and Technology THAT

section 29 of

Part Ill of The Revenue Act as set out on page 28 of Bill 51 be amended by striking out "or" at the end of clause (c); by adding "or" after clause (d), and by adding after clause (

d) the following clause: (

e) a transfer of a family asset within the meaning of The Marital Property Act between spouses or former spouses, including a transfer from an executor or admin istrator upon the death of a spouse. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is the amendment agreed to? The Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, I have to put a few comments on the record. I support the amendment, Mr. Chairman. I think I take a little bit of responsibility maybe for bringing it forward. 3920

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 Mr. Chairman, sometimes I have to give the NDP credit for being smart, but many more times they're lu cky. Had this issue been brought up before 20 people from the press and the media present, I dare say it would have been an issue, and I'm surprised in fact they didn't pick it up because it had been covered.

Here is a case where, because of the new land transfer tax in place, an individual who had the ownership of his or her home in their one name, wanting to now place the ownership of that home or that piece of land in two names - in the name of the other spouse - to make that transfer, Mr. Chairman, there would have been the full impact with the land transfer tax cutback. Mr. Chairman, can you imagine the harangue if we had done that?

If we had brought a bill in, a new taxation act, which had overlooked that, it would have been a front-page headline, and yet the NDP, in some infinite wisdom or whatever - I'd say good luck or maybe it's something else; maybe if they do it, it's overlooked - they were able to bring in this change, this amendment, without a whimper anywhere. Mr. Chairman, politics can be strange at times, because I know we would have paid, as a party, a politic al price had we made this mistake. I'm glad the Minister has brought it forward and I suppo rt the amendment. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Mr.

Chairman, I just want to respond to some of the comments the member made. First of all, I acknowledge that he did spark my interest in this particular sec tion at one point during the Session, so I was pleased that he did raise that issue. But I would remind him - and I have never taken the time to research who first brought in the fees that exist for land transfer - in essence, that was the case with the old taxation system, if I can use that term.

Someone advised me, because it was called a fee, but it was a fee based on a graduated - to an extent - on a percentage, but it was still a fee that was charged to people in this cir cumstanc e prior to us com ing straightforward and calling it a tax, No. 1 . . .. MR. C. MANNESS: $70.00. HON. E. KOSTYRA: No, it was based on a percentage so it would vary by the size of the property or the value of the property. Also it penal ized people who had mortgages. So a spouse who was transferring property that had a mortgage would actually pay more if they had a mortgage on the property than one that didn't.

So it's not that this didn't exist prior to the imposition of this tax. lt was certainly amplif ied because we did, firstly, change it from a fee to a tax because it was revenue generated. So it's better to be up front and call it a tax rather than sugges ting it's jus t a fee and somehow it just equates to the cost of providing that service. Second ly, we put it on a true graduated scale that it is based on the value of the property and not including mortgages, which was, in some ways, a penalty to people who didn't have the wealth or the cash and had to assume mortgages in order to purchase properties.

But nevertheless, I was glad that the member did raise the issue and that we are able to make that correction. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, one question to the Minister. 3921 Is he saying then that there will be absolutely no tax, no fee, associated with transferring the ownership in the name of a single spouse, putting into joint names? Will there be any fee at all? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: There still will be the transaction fee that exists through the Department of the Attorney General, the Land Titles, which I believe is $30 -it could be $25 - but that fee will exist under - because it's now truly split - this is a tax under the Department of Finance, and the admin istration fee, which is just an nominal fee, is under the Attorney-Gener al's Department, Land Titles. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. MR. CHAIRMAN: Page 28, as amended- pass. Pages 29 to 35, inclusive, were each read and passed ; Title- pass;

Preamble-pass. Bill be reported. BILL NO. 52 -THE ENERGY RATE STABILIZATION ACT MR. CHAIRMAN: Bill No. 52,

An Act to amend The Energy Rate Stabilization Act. The Honourable Minis ter. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just again would point out that I did provide detailed clause-by-clause analysis of this bill for the Opposition critic and I gave an extra copy for the Energy critic of the Opposition, so I won't bother reading into the record all the clause-by-clause explanation. In addition, there were some questions raised in between the comm ittee review of this and the Second Reading regarding some of the specific debt of Hydro, and I also had staff provide that information to the mem ber. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honou rable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, the Minister is correct. He has given me information detailing the loans of government that have been specifically set aside in support of Manitoba Hydro. Mr.

Chairman, what I was hoping to do at this time was not to draw the discussion on this bill out, but I was hoping that the Minister could, on one of the debt issues, walk me through, so to speak, the exercise to show the members of the House how it is now the responsibility of a loan, any one we want to detail, the responsibility of Manitoba Hydro in having now to meet the foreign exchange fluctuation, i.e., loss, in most cases - how in simple mathematics that would be done as a result of this bill. Can the Minister of Finance do that or the Minister of Ener gy, either Minister? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: I can't take a specific loan and take the member through it, but basically it is that - I'll use the case of the responsibility that rests still with the province - any of the issues that are outstanding that are non-Canadian, non-U.S., the province is still responsible for. Any of the losses, or gains, for that

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 matter, that may come about when the time runs on those issues would have to continue to be absorbed by the tax base or the expenditure base through the statutory payments under Hydro Rate Stabilization. We will see a continuation for a number of years of costs associated with those offshore non -Nor th American loans, and we'll probably see next year - because there is a major issue coming due, a Swiss issue - that there may well be, indeed, an increase in costs depending on where the Swiss franc will be against the Canadian. You can take different points in time.

Today, it's strengthened a bit as against yesterd ay, but it's down considerably from where it was a few weeks ago or at least a few months ago. So, in the case of the government, there will be increased costs associated with that if the Swiss franc stays at relatively the same position it is now. Obviou sly, if it goes one way or the other, that would impact on the costs that have to be paid out that were not amortized. As the member is aware, all of the non-Canadian issues are amortized on a three-year moving average.

In the case of Hydro, the Minister of Energy and Mines may want to comment further, but they are now respo nsible for all existing U.S. pay debt and any new debt that will be entered into, secured after April 1 of this year, whether it be Canadian - well, Canadian doesn't matter - but U.S. or offshore, that Hydro will be responsible for any losses, or will receive any gains from any changes in currencies of loans that are entered into subsequent to April I. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, the Minister has given me some further detail, but still, let's talk about the loan coming due, the Hydro loan coming due.

I think it's series AC. it's been borrowed in Swiss francs. The date of maturity according to the document that 1 have out of Public Accounts says November 1, 1988. The amount outstanding as of March 31, 1986, was $1 16.7 million. I believe, and I'll go to another list that 1 have before me, Swiss francs, looking at AC, yes, Mr. Chairman, right now there's an unamo rtized foreign exchange loss, and again I'm referring to the long page documents given to me by the Minister of Finance, when I asked him to provide for me an amortization of foreign exchange fluctuations, loan by loan. Mr.

Chairman, when one looks at that particular loan, payable in 1988, one can't help but note that the par value was $200 million. Pardon me, I think it was taken out in Swiss francs, so it was $200 million Swiss francs that we borrowed. The book value at the date of issue was $1 16.7 million, but today, not even today, as of February 20, 1987, we had to pay back $14 5.4 million and the exchange rate of that day was .727. Today, Mr. Chairman, it is, I believe higher than that.

I was going to look that up. 1 dare say, unless the Swiss franc drops against the Canadian dollar sign ificantly within the next year and three months, that we will end up owing, as a loss on that one issue, $40 million. Now, will that loss, in its entirety, now transfer to Manitoba Hydro? And will Manitoba Hydro have to reflect that entire loss, first of all, within the reporting fiscal year and, therefore, the year after reflect it totally within the rate structure? Mr.

Chairman, if the Minister of Finance can give me his answer to that one - it's more than an example; it's more than theory; it's almost inevitable that it'll happen - then I'm satisfied; I can do the rest myself. I just want to know how it is that the government now passing these foreign exchange fluctuations - handing them off, so to speak - to Manitoba Hydro, how it is that Manitoba Hydro then is going to deal with them. HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Could the member - unfortunately I've got, it seems to me, every other piece of paper except the one that he's making reference to - could he jus t quote the issue again and the date? Let me ask you: Is that an issue that was entered prior to April 1, 1987? MR. C. MANNESS: Yes. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Okay, then, I can answer the question.

Wel l, without getting into the details of - that was a Swiss issue again - without getting into the details, because I can't, I don't have that detailed information, but that will remain the responsibility of the government through direct expenditures because that issue is an offshore issue which was entered into prior to April 1, 1987.

Any of the old - and I'm using the term "old" - loans, old being any loan that was entered into prior to April 1, 19 87, any loan that is offshore, that being non-No rth America, will remain the responsibility of the Department of Fina nce and will be paid out through the appropriations for energy rate stabilization funds in the Budget. So, in the example he gave, that will not be a res ponsibility of Manitoba Hydro in terms of the currency fluctuation. That will be the responsibility of the Department of Finance.

Now again, without getting into specifics of the figure, part of the losses to date, based on the formula established for the amortization of such losses on the three year moving average, is reflected in the costs of borrowing for ERSA on a yearly basis. The portion, the difference that may exist at the time when that debt comes due in November - I believe it was - of 1988, whatever the rate of exchange is at that point in time, when we must pay it off, that portion will be have to be paid out from the appropriation for ERSA out of the Department of Finance, next year.

So whatever is not amortized between the three-year amortization moving average, and that which will be in effect at the point in time when we have to pay that, will be what additional amounts of money will have to be paid out agains t that loan. So that is no t a respon sibility of hydro. lt remains the responsibility of the taxpayers through expenditures. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, the Minister has cleared that away.

Now the example that I used now, in a theoretical sense, dealing with American issues, because the bill states, and I quote, "Manitoba Hydro would assume respon sibility for fluctuation of the value of the U.S. dollar denomi nated debt," and it says, "issued by, or on behalf . . . "- let me repeat this. Prior to April 1, 19 87, Mr. Chairman, I look at the U.S. currency area, and I look at issues 11. (1) and 11 .(n), 3922

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 and there we have some deg ree of loss. With the U.S. debt, where we've had fluctuations in currencies, and now we owe more than the face value of the debt that we took the responsibility of assu ming, well, those losses when they come due, and here's the year specifically - '89 - and those two issues 11. (1), 11 .(

n) come due in '89. Given that the Canadian dollar does not change vis-a-vis the American dollar in the next two years, would those losses be totally the resp onsibility of Manitoba Hydro? Furthermore then, at this point, given the levels of exchange in place, what is the liability that we're shifting from the taxpayers to the ratepayers of Manitoba Hydro? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honou rable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Manitoba Hydro indeed would be picking up that loss. I do not have the figures available with me to tell you how much it would be.

I know that Manitoba Hydro had been doing calculations to make sure that unless there were situations like drought, which are unforeseen, take into accounl normal weather conditions, they would be, thro utJh their revenues and their expenditures, picking up any of those foreign exchange losses of a U.S. nature and living within the 5 percent or lower than inflation rate increase commitment that had been made. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, that's jus t a mathematical analysis. This is at a picture point in time.

If the currency rates stay in effect that are in existence today, what liability is going to be shifted to Manitoba Hydro away from the Government of Manitoba as a result of this bill? Sur ely that figure exists. I understand why that figure is only good for this point in time because currencies fluctuate, but what is the total value of that today? That number certainly has to be in existence somewhere. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. E. KOSTYRA: I jus t want to clarify one point for the member.

This is probably why he thinks that the increases would have to be at levels higher than what has been indicated by Manitoba Hydro or the Minister responsible. Again, it is only the portion of the unamortized portion that will be their responsibil ity. So the amortized portion is still shown on the books to the extent that it's covered by the three-year moving average. I don't have the figure with me. Presumab ly, we do have a figure that exists somewhere that shows that.

On the basis of the review that we did, along with the Minister of Energy and Mines, with Manitoba Hydro, we were both satisfied that those costs would be containe d in the additional adjustment that was anno unced as part of the Budget, the additiona l adjustment to hydro rates. As a result of that adjustment and the present plans of hydro, relative to their projections, a further cost increase would be maintained as the Minister has previously stated, unless there is some major catastrophe that is not anticipated in terms of drought or some other factors.

But otherwise, our expectation is the hydro rates will not increase higher than what has been previously stated. MR. C. MANNESS: Let me say this for the record, Mr. Chairman, that right now, at this point in time, we have these issues on the book, payable in U.S. dollars, firstly under the column - and these are issues that Manitoba Hydro is directly responsible for themselves and the government has guaranteed them - there are issues 1U, 12, 2F, 2G, 3A, 3M, 3C, 3E, 3H, 3L and 3M. Some of them go out to the year 2006, Mr. Chairman. There's a sum total there at issue value of $756 million.

I add to that issues 11 L, 11 N, AV, 11 E, 9J, 9K, 9U, AM, 9M, and 100. I listed off at least a dozen issues, Mr. Chairman. I am of the view that there's a liability associated with those 12 or however many issues I named, that there's a liability there upwards of at least a couple of hundred million dollars. That's being shifted to Manitoba Hydro. I know that number can be provided to me; I know that number is dynamic, it's not static; it can come back or it can go out.

I'd have to believe and hope that it's going to come back, but today there's a liability shift from the Government of Manitoba to Manitoba Hydro. I expect that the Minister would bring forward, would be forthright enough to give us that number, that figure in debate. I asked the Minis ter in debate the other day if we could work toward that number. Mr. Chairman, let me say for the record that there is a considerable shift of liabi lity - I cannot quantify it at this point in time - as between the province and Manitoba Hydro. Let the record show that the Opposition was aware of it; we cannot quantify it.

If the government can, we will accept their number, but the net result of it, over the next 10 years, in that one decision alone, in principle, I might say, Mr. Chairman, probably to be suppor ted by the Opposition. But in that one decision, there is going to be a requirement of ratepayers to increase the rates - by how much, it's difficult to say - but I think it's incumbent that it be put on the record. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I can't confirm that and I don't have those specific figures. As the member is aware, they literally will change day by day. I dare say -(Interjection)- Yes, they do.

In fact, they'v e changed sign ificantly from when the decisions were made, based on where the U.S. dollar was against the Canadian dolla r, in a positive way, as the member is aware, over the last while. But I will confirm that there is substantial movement back to Manitoba Hydro, the responsibility for that debt, and it is sign ificant.

Again, I repeat for the record, based on the work that we have done, based on the work that Manitoba Hydro has done and based on reaso nable projections, that will be absorbed within the special adjustment that was put in as a result of the Budg et this year and will be accommodated as part of any further increase that was made before the decision was made to revert the responsibility back to Manitoba Hydro for all new debt and the past U.S. pay debt. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, I serve notice to the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro that we will ask this question in Commit tee of Public Utilities 3923

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 Commi ttee a year or a half a year from now, whenever we reconvene that, because obviously that's a transfer of liability to Manitoba Hydro. I expect now, in some circles, it will possibly be printed at that point in time. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: I have received notice from the mem ber. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it the will of the commi ttee to consider the bill clause by clause, page by page, or bill as a whole? Bill as a whole- pass. Bill be reported. BILL NO. 53 -THE OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION TAX ACT MR.

CHAIRMA N: Bill No. 53, The Oil and Gas Production Tax Act. The Honourable Minister. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you. Just for the record, I would again just confirm that I will not provide detailed cla use-by-clause comments on the bill. I did provide that for the members opposite some time ago, at the time of introduction for tabling of the bill. I would also jus t note, to help facilitate our work in this commit tee, that there are some amendments that I also did pass on to the member on two pages - pages 2 and 16. I think that the Minister of Energy and Mines responded to some of the comments or questions raised.

I would just respond to one I don't think he responded to specifically , and that was the whole enforcement secti on. Basically , what we've done is made this

section consistent with other provincial statutes, both within Manitoba and - I hesitate to say this, but I will anyway - consistent with this kind of variant in Saskatchewan and Alb erta because, as the member is aware, these kinds of taxation measures are somewhat compl icated areas. We certainly try to harmon ize in terms of specific areas with other provinces. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Chairman, I want to be very specific, because part of the rationale used for this change in tax - and I'll quote the comment. lt says, "Some of the new features of this act are: Simp lify adminis trative and recordkeep ing procedu res by not having to maintain records, and the mailing of 1, 640 assess ment and tax no tices to the mine ral righ t holders." Mr. Chairman, can the Minister indic ate that there are a number, then, of mineral right holders who no longer will receive any type of request, any type of an asse ssment from the government as a result of this new tax act? MR.

CHAI RMAN: The Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: I can't be certain, but I think there's a process of gazetting for that which people are aware of, rather than individual notices. MR. C. MANNESS: The Minister is going to have to be more definitive than that, Mr. Chairman. Does he mean that if the mineral right holder doesn't get the gazette and doesn 't know what form to fill out, he then will still be taxed? Is it automatic? I don't understand how the process flows. HON. W. PARASIUK: The tax is on the production. lt's not on the right; it's on the production.

They get notice -(Interjection)- Pardon? -(Interjection)- Yes, this is on the production. MR. C. MANNESS: On purely production? HON. W. PARASIUK: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: Since there are two amendments, at least, we will consider the bill page by page. Page 1- pass. Page 2, there is an amendment. The Honourable Minister. HON. E.

KOSTYRA: I move, seconded by the Minister of Emp loyment Services and Economic Security, THAT the definition of "working interest" in su bsection 1(1) of Bill 53 be struck out and the following definition be su bstituted therefor: working interest" means an interest in a wel l, or in any oil or gas produc ed therefrom or al located thereto, including the mineral right owner's share of procedur es therefrom. MR. CHAIRMAN: The amendment is also moved in Fren ch, as pri nted. (Agr eed) The amend ment is approved. Page 2, as amended -pa ss. Pages 3 to 15, incl usive, were each read and passed.

Page 16, there is an amendment. HON. E. KOSTYRA: I move, seconded by the Minis ter of Energy and Mines, THAT su bsection 19 (1) of the Bill be struck out and the following su bsect ion be substituted therefor: Certification of Tax. 19

(1) Any tax, penalty or interest payable under this Act and remaining unpaid, in whole or in part, may be certified by the minis ter after the expiration of six months from the time the tax, penalty or interest is levied and the minister may register the certificate in the Land Titles Office of any Land Titles District and, from the time of the registration, the certificate is a charge on all lands of the debtor against which the certificate is registered by instrument char ging specific land, and, whil e registered in the general registrar, against all lands of the debtor in the Land Titles District in which it is registered that are held in a name identical to that of the 3924

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 debtor set forth in the certificate whether or not the lands are registered under The Real Property Act. MR. CHAIRMAN: The same amendment, in French, as printed. Is that agreed? (Agreed) Amendment-pa ss. Page 16, as amended- pass; page 17 -(lnt erjection) en franc;:ais on every page- pass; pages 18 to 21, inclusive, were each read and passed ;

Preamble-pa ss; Title- pass. Bill be reported, as amended. BILL NO. 56 -THE MINING CLAIM TAX ACT MR. CHAIRMAN: The next bill under consideration by the comm ittee is Bill 56, The Mining Claim Tax Act. The Honour able Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: I made the concerns of myself and mem bers of the Op position kn own on this bill. I understand the reason why it's here.

I received assurances from the Minister at the time that he would not take advantage of the one concern that I have and what representatives of the mining ind ustry have expressed to me, that they would not, in haste, or imp rudently, alter changes now made possible by transferring certain features of the act into regulations which, previous to this, were embodied right in the bill. We 'll have to take the Minister's good intentions in this respect and his concern, I'm sure, for treating the ind ustry with consideration when changes are made and announced.

The spokespersons for the mining industry confirm what the Minister has confirmed to me in private, that there are no changes of substance in the bill, and I'm prepared to see it pass, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Since there is no amendment, do we want to pass the bill as a whole? -(lnterjection) Pass. Bill be reported. Comm ittee rise. Call in the Speak er. IN SESSION The Chairman reported that the Committee of the Whole had considered Bills No. 51 and 53, respectively , and reported same with amendment; and had considered Bills No. 52 and 56, respectiv ely, and reported same without amendment.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Bu rrows. MR. C. SANTOS: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, that the report of the commi ttee be received . MOTION presented and carried. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speaker, as you're probably aware, accord ing to rule 64. 1(1) , there is a time restriction in respect to the total number of hours for the review of Estimates in comm ittee. lt appears as if we may, in fact, be exceeding that time estimate in order to complete the consideration of The Loan Act.

I would, therefore, suggest that the House grant leave to allow the comm ittee to exceed the 240 hours so that we can continue on with consideration of Bill No. 57 once we have reached that 240-hour limit. MADAM SPEAKER: Is that agreed? (Agreed) The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Attorney-General, that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair for the House to go into Comm ittee of the Whole to consider and report on the Capital Supp ly, Bill 57, The Loan Act, 1987.

MOTION presented and carried and the Ho use resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider and report on Bill No. 57, with the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE BILL NO. 57 - THE LOAN ACT, 1987 MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: The Comm ittee of the Whole House will now come to order to consider Bill No. 57. The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Chair .

I'd jus t remind members we had already started consideration of Bill 57 at a previous sitting of the comm ittee, and we did, at that time, provide detailed clause-by-clause notes for the Opposition Finance critic. I'd also just like to serve notice - and I did provide this to the Opposition Finance critic - of an amendment to this act to comply with an amendment which was made to Bill 68, I believe it was, dealt with by comm ittee last night, a minor amendment changing the name. So, with that, I would urge members for speedy passage of consideration of this bill in comm ittee. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Does the Member for Pembina wish to speak? MR. D. ORCHARD: Please, Mr. Chairman. I'm making a presumption that may be wrong. Is the Minister responsible for the Telephone System also responsible for Data Services? HON. E. KOSTYRA: That's incorrect. it's Len Evans. MR. D. ORCHARD: First of all, on the Telephone System, $45.9 mi llion is bei ng requested here. Obviou sly, it's for this cu rrent year's capital expenditures.

Last year, I believe, when we were in Telephone System Estimates, the former Minis ter of Telephone s provided us with a list of the sched uled capital expansions that would use this $45 million or use last 3925

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 year's loan authority. Does the Minister have a list of capital projects that he can table with myself now? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister responsible for Crown corporations. HON. G. DOER: Mr. Chairman, I don't have a specific list, but I can indicate what the capital, the $45.9 million, was required for. lt's out of a capital progam, Mr. Chairman, of $1 65 million for the '87-88 year, as we've indicated in previous comm ittee meetings. So, therefore, we're requesting 27 percent for the '87 Loan Act.

The specifics of the loan requirements are $11 3 million, or 69 percent, is required to meet the existing telecom munications services. This is based on growth, the mo vement of exis ting tele communi cation equipment, and replacement of worn out and dama ged plant. We 've increased spe nding in this area considerably .

We have $48.1 million or 29 percent for plant spending that is earmarked to provide new services in terms of replacing obsolete equipment and upgrading existing equipment to current standards, and some specific highlights of that: 21 rural exchanges to be modernized with digital switching; five Winnip eg central offices will have additional digital switching capacity - and I should say some of them are oversubscribed in a number of areas; automatic number identification to allow long dis tance calls for an additional 12 exchanges.

We are also spending, as we indicated in comm ittee, one-half of a $20-million commitment this year for the national fibre optic line, which of cou rse is going through Southern Man itoba, one -h alf of it this year, Mr. Chairman. That's the sum capital list. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to have to read Hans ard on that, because I've got a little bit of activity over here and I mis sed some of the latter answers. HON. G. DOER: I'll give it to you in writing. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chair man, I apologize in advance to the commit tee, but I was unable to attend the last meetings of the Telephone System, in which I had intentions of asking a number of questions in terms of expansion in rural service. They may have been asked by others of my colleagues and, if they were, I'll read Hansard and follow up from there, but in case they weren't, the basic questions that I would have of the Minister are: In rural Manitoba, as he well knows, there are the two issues; first of all, size of exchange and private lines in rural Manitoba.

Now is there capital earmarked in this $1 65-million budget to further expand upon the extended area of service program that was initiated in 19 81, so that more commun ities are joined in a toll free fashion, the neighboring commun ities are joined in a toll- free fashion? If so, what commun ities will be involved in that this year? I'll pose that question; then I'll pose the one on private lines. HON. G. DOER: I couldn't hear the whole question. The member - and I just got some of the general points - mentioned that there were two issues, and he's absolutely right.

In fact, in my conversat ions with a number of rural commun ities, it seems to me that the issue of extended areas is the major priority although, when I hear questions in the House and comments from people, they're very concerned about the number of people on the multi party lines.

I would like to actually work and develop a plan over this summer with the consultation process and make public a proposal that we'll consult with municipa lities on and members of this Legislature, and file with the PUB in both areas, identifying what we're going to spend, where we're going to spend it, how much it's going to cost, and how we're going to raise the money. I didn't hear the specific ques tion. I did have a lot of the technical people at the comm ittee at the last hearing. In fact, I even had the two regional managers there to answer a lot of the specifics about the individual exchanges.

If that's the ques tion, I could provide that to the memb er in greater detail than I may have right now. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the latter part of my question was: If the extended area service program is ongoing this year, which commun ities would be receiving the extended area service with this capital program? HON. G. DOER: There are some and I'll provide that to the mem ber. lt is involved in the overall spending of providing new services, some $48 million under this Loan Act, in terms of replacing obsolete equipment and upgrading existing equipment.

I'll get a breakdown of that number for the member in terms of the - there are 21 rural exchanges to be modernized, but I'll find out, of those 21, how many are being expanded as oppo sed to just being modernized, which is the question I think he's asking. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, can the Minister, and I know he's probably been asked this a number of times - the mult iparty line is a problem in rural Man itoba, particularly with the farm commun ity, because many farms nowadays, as long as the service exists, are hooked into the comput er system for information - lnfomart - for markets, commodity trends, etc., etc., and they use that as a pretty successful management tool. One of the prerequisites of using that on the farm is, of course, a private line.

In many areas there was a program two or three years back where $500 would bring you a private line, but that was normally at the expense of other multi party line users. In other words, if they could free up a single private line, they would do so by increasing up to four, members on the neighbour's party line. lt was first come, first served - in effect, quite discrimina tory, because really if you didn't apply first, and all the capacity was used up, you didn't get a private line. In fact, you'd end up with more people on your multi party line, quite the opposite to what you desired.

So that was an unfair program, but it was nevertheless undertaken, and I don't want to get into the politics of the program. That's not the point this afternoon. The question I'd like to ask the Minister is: What is the policy rate now in terms of anyone who requests 3926

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 a private line, who currently is on a party line? Can they avail themselves of private line service on a farm? And I'm speaking specifically of farm instances, and what would be the process? HON. G. DOER: Mr. Chairman, I have not changed the existing policies of the Telephone System yet in terms of many of the nuances dealing with who gets a single party line, why and how much they pay for it.

The other issue is the issue of who gets dump ed - has a single party line and then all of a sudden the next day gets dump ed on to a multi party line. lt seems to me there are a number of unfair parts of our policy in the Telephone System, and I, quite frankly , don't have a handle on all of the rationales of those yet.

I'd like to bring one to the member's attention. lt costs a major amount of money for expansion of a telec ommu nica tions system into new urban development, yet I don't see the costs being borne out by ur ban ind ividuals the same way I see new developments being paid for by members of rural Manitoba. I've asked the Telephone System, why do we have this system, one standard for a large urban area? I understand there are more lines and it's easier to do and you get your money back quic ker, but why do we have this one standard in urban areas and another standard in rural Manitoba?

Beyond that, there are all kinds of tariff regulations, of who has to pay and what they have to pay, assigned by the PUB, often filed by the Telephone System initially. Then there's a combination of things that have been grandfathered with two lines and many items that were grandfathered in '78 and'7 9 that are causi ng me problems in terms of individual residents of rural Manitoba, in terms of it doesn't appear to be fair to them in terms of the cost and the services.

I hope to have a handle on all those issues this fall and articulate a broader poli cy, including some of the things I think - just from a gut sense - are unfair in Winnipeg. lt's too bad we didn't catch it, perhaps, before the urban boom took place, because maybe we could have used that money to subsidize - and I believe in subsidies in the Telephone System - some of the other requirements in rural Manitoba.

But I want to get a handle on a lot of those nuances because I haven't been able to understand all the rationals of them, except to say they're tariffs, or they're precedence or they're grandfathered, or this and that. I think the mem ber is absolutely right and that's why Saskatchewan is proceed ing with an accelerated program for single line service because the phone now has comp uter capacity and I feel we should be doing the same thing.

The question is how fast we do it, and what it'll cost, and who will pay it, but I think we should be decreasing the 48,000 or 49,000 and moving towards a plan whereby in "X" number of years they'll all be gone. But at the same time, I don't want that to erode extended areas, which I hear from municip alities is even a greater priority, of cour se depend ing on where people live. That is kind of a general answer to a specific question, Mr. Chairman.

Ins tead of reacting to things that look unfair to me on the gut level , I want to get a broader policy on it, and consult, quite frankly , with mem bers opposite, including the Opposition critic, because I want to file with PUB a broad program for the next 10 years at the Telephone System rather than just ad hocking it. I don't like the fact that we want to reduce the number of people of multi party li nes and then know of examples in Roblin- Russell and other examples where we're adding people to those multiparty lines. I don't think that makes any sense at all.

I have not intervened in those policies yet, till I try to get a sense of an overview and then come in with a broader policy position, rather than picking away at some of the inequities. But I mention the one from urban to rural, because I think that's an interesting thing. For example, the Edmonton Telephone System, which is a specific telephone system just to that city, they levy a major cost to putting in those lines which may be up to a considerable amount higher than $1 ,000.00.

They levy that into the whole syste m. lt seems to me that would be a fair way to get some more money into the revenue area for purpos es of total provincial development. But those are the questions I hav en't yet had answered. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, in terms of the rural system, first of all, Saskatchewan is doing a major, major expansion into private line service in rural Saskatchewan. That's been ongoing now, I believe for two years.

Now I recognize the cost there, but you know what I guess incenses a lot of the farm community is that the Telephone System, where it comes to telephone service, for instance, to cottages at a number of our recreational lakes in the Whiteshell area, will put telephone lines in which are private line service to summer cottages at no cost to the individual. That isn't a busi ness telephone; that is simply a convenience telephone at the lake.

Yet in rural Manitoba, because the system is already in place, we're expected to simply make do with that. lt's those kinds of inequities that rural Manitobans see at the lake resort areas. I know my colleague, the Member for Roblin-R ussell, pointed out examples where in his area the lake developments have single private-line telephone service and the farm community doesn't and that's right side by side, if you will. Tha t's the polic y that rural Manitobans find particularly inequitable and unfair.

I realize it's expensiv e to resolve. lt was expensive when we were looking at it too, but it's an area that has to be resolved because our farms are becoming ever more important busi nesses and need every break, in terms of commun ication and computerization that you can get. Now, Mr. Chairman, in the second area, I' d like the Minister to table later on the policy on private line service for rural Manitobans who go from a multiline to a private line by applicati on. Now I want to know how they're charged. Like there are some areas that the $500 flat fee applied no matter how far you were from town.

Other areas, they are charged on the basis of distance from the nearest exchange. There is even some apparent confusion and I'd like to get to the bottom of it - and I wanted to be at the comm ittee hearing, but of course, I wasn't there - but there even is some confusion where an individual farmer has paid for his private telephone - in other words, the 3927

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 installation charge that Telephones requested to come from the nearest exchange to his farm - and then additionally to that, after having paid presumably a contribution towards the additional capital cost, he is charged a monthly fee by mile age. I don't think that's universally applied. Can the Minister provide to me later on the policy guideline that's used? Because I'v e got some individuals at home that have been riding my rear end, if you will, as to why this appears to be applied to them and not to other people.

I don't think, if the Minister checks, he will find that that policy is necessarily universally applied. Sometimes the mileage distance charges are; sometimes they're not. Again, that's a case of inequity that I think has to be straightened out. HON. G. DOER: I think the member raises some legitima te points. I'm finding that every time I see an inequity, I find a "grandfather clause" that started sometime before, and all tied to tariffs.

I think it's about time we took a look at all the grandfather clauses and all the policies and all the tariff regulations, and tried to put them together with what our priorities are, and have an overall policy that I could try to explain in this House because I could n't now. I know they're all tied to PUB tariffs and they interweave with grandfather clauses of the Public Utilities Board, and then you go back to some other policy on how many are on a line versus how many are on another system in terms of an extended area.

That's one of the things we want to do this year in the fall period, in terms of the rural consultation, is get a handle on all those things because people are - you mention the term "on your rear end." I can tell you they're on my proverbial rear end as well, and rightly so. So I'd like to get all these things together so I can begin to explain it and then we can begin to rationalize it. I will send the existing tariff-grandfather - and that's what they call it - provisions to the mem ber.

All those policies that I mentioned at the latest hearing are on the table because we want to review every one of them for what we're going to do in terms of rural improvement services. Yes, Saskatchewan has gone. They have 78,0 00 multi party lines now. They're moving to reduce that number because of the computer on the farm. They've stopped moving in extended areas, by the way. They're putting all their money into the single lines as opposed to multi party lines. But we want to look at that in terms of where we think we should be going. I'll forward that to the mem ber. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. G. FIND LAY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have one quick question for the Minister responsible for Telephones. I've had two different communities in my area, both with volunteer fire departments, ask me about the FRED system and where the new Minister of MTS is going to go with that proposal that has been developed by MTS techni cians. They've been in discussion with Municipal Affairs, with Labour , with mem bers of .his department.

I'd like the Minister maybe to tell us wHether that's part of the package that will be reported on in their proposal that's going to be brought forward this fall, or whether he intends to shelve that important proposal that has been drafted over the past, about seven or eight years? HON. G. DOER: Well, Mr.

Chairman, the FRED program is one of the areas that some of the honourable mem bers across the way have been highly critical of - not in terms of its impo rtance but in terms of two aspects to it: (1) is the inability of other radio companies to compete on the public telephone sys tem, fire alarm system; and (2) is the fact that MTS allegedly has understated the costs and overstated the revenues. We are reviewing FRED.

In fact, we've referred it to Coopers and Lybrand in terms of the projections. lt looks like the cost projections that we did have a couple of years ago are not accurate if one includes all costs - capital, depreciation, interest rates, etc.- in terms of Project FRED. I said at the comm ittee awhile ago that if there are projects of a socially redeeming factor at the Telephone System, that we would n't try to defend them as making mone y, but we would defend them as a socially redeeming project and identify clearly to the public how much that costs. And it is costing money now.

We belie ve FRED falls within that general mandate of being a very necessary service of the municipalities, but we would want to defend it in this forum and to the public as an emergency safety service, not as a "cash revenue product in the Telephone Syst em." So I think we want to clarify the mandate of FRED. The second issue is that we're looking at private radio operations interconnecting with the Manitoba Telephone System. lt didn't make sense for us to have illegal operations in La Broquerie, Manitoba. I guess the Memb er for Emer son is aware of that in La Broquerie.

There was a big battle going on in Lakeside before with the municip alities. We want to clarify that position if we're going to have interconnect with cellular telephone. lt only makes sense that local radio operators have the right to interconnect to the system and be part of that alarm system. The key is - and I think one of the companies proposing it is Motorola - the key is that they should pay a fair tariff on the line. The other prop osal that the municipa lit ies are proposing is that MTS pay for everything. I think that's a couple million dollars per year, Mr. Chairman.

The munici palities that you talk about, I know the individual, I think, is the Chair from Shoal Lake, is it? MR. A. DRIEDGER: . . . and then they lost money in Saudi Arabia - it will take them 25 years. HON. G. DOER: We ll, 13 1/ 2 years - to the Member for Emerson. But I have talked to the individual. I believe it's Mr. Edmundson from Shoal Lake. He gave me a good presentation of FRED as an aside to the other equipment problems they were having in their area.

If the government was going to have all of the municipal fire service alarm system paid for, that would be a political decision - one mem bers opposite may criticize as affecting the rates - at a political level, intervening in the "objective rate setting." Notwithstanding that, we know that report is in. The bottom line is I don't 3928

Thursday, 16 Ju ly, 1987 see a very valuable service in munici palities such as FRED being cut or reviewed the same way as Project FAST and some other projects because it was justified. lt has a safety factor to it and a value to the munici palities. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Ho nour able Mem ber for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, quickly to the Mini ster: When do we get cellular telephones in Manitoba? HON. G. DOER: I thought you were going to ask me about Project FAST. I was very disappointed. Mr.

Chairman, cellular telephone s, we'r e now negotiating with Cantel on the tariff that they would pay to get on the public line. There have been two proposals, I believe - and I haven't got a current update - back and forth between Cantel and the Manitoba Telephone System. What they are planning to do is arrive at a fair tariff and file, if they can, jointly with the PUB for that tariff. If they can't, they will have to file separately with it. I have asked them to get it comple ted by August 15 and go to the PUB because people are waiting. There's a major waiting list for that service. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, the Minister of Telephones jokingly made reference to FAST, and when he does table the FAST analysis, which will show probably $8 million or $9 million of loss, I hope he also tables the que stions I posed , particu larly , to his predece ssor , the Member for St. James, who said how wonderful a system it was and how wonderful it was doing, just like he said about MTX and Saudi Arabia. I admit we put it in and I admit that we were sold a bill of goods. I warned the government for four years while it continued to pour money down the drain on FAST.

So I'm waiting for that report to show how much the losses were and how many times they were warned and didn't do anything about it, particularly "Candy stripe" in front of him there who didn't do a thing about it. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! A MEMBER: The sheik's tent. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, yes, Mr. Chairman. For a $27 million dol lar loss in Saudi Arabia, we got a chunk out of a sheik's tent that he made into a shirt and sent to the Member for St. James. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Data Services: What is the $9.4 million capital authority intended to do? What are they spending the money on in Manitoba Data Services? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honour able Minister of Labour. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairperson, while the Minister is getting that information, I wanted to just put on the record my appreciation for the efforts of the Hon ourable Member for Pembina when he was Minister responsible for the Telephones. A MEMBER: Oh, here we go! SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON. A.

MACKLING: After the previous Minis ter, the Honourable Member for Lakeside was very rudely embarrassed in this Chamber by not being aware of the fact that the Telephone System had entered into contracts without authority that were very embarrassing to the government. But the Honour able Member for Pembina was made Minister because he was that super Minister who was going to clean things up in the Telephone System. What did he do, Mr. Chairp erson? Did he do some thing with those adminis trators who were adventurous, who were doing things without authority? No, he didn't do that. He gave bonus es to Mr. Aysan.

He didn't discipline anyone in the Telephone System. Mr. Chai rper son, here I was, a Min ister of the Telephone System, having before me not only my three colleagues who had been Ministers of the Telephone System who had relied on the expertise of Mr. Holland and all of his subordi nate adminis trative staff, including the legal staff, including Mr.

Aysan and all those, but I had confidence in knowing that the Honourable Member for Pembina had kept those staff, endorsed those staff and had felt that they were certa inly important enough and responsible enough to be left, even after the emba rras sment to the Honourable Member for Lakeside was made in this Cham ber. So when the Honourable Member for Pembina was asking those questions of me in commit tee, I turned to Mr. Holland, the CEO of the Telephone System, and of cou rse he recognized, told me, that the Honourable Member for Pembina was being political. Sure, he was being political.

He was a former Minister responsible for the Telephone System and was assumed to have some expertise and kno wledge, and was just trying to put down the good programs that he had initiated, including FAST. Because the Honourable Member for Pembina not only recognized that Mr. Ho lland and Mr. Aysan had initiated developments in Saudi Arabia, they had also initiated FAST under the tutelage of the Honour able Member for Pembina. Those same people. And he endorsed that activity.

So when the Honour able Member for Pembina was ques tioning FAST, among others of the Telephone Sys tem's programs, I agreed with the CEO, Mr. Holland, that the Ho nourable Member for Pembina was grandstanding, was trying to make a play, trying to become the Leader of the Opposition by playing up these issues, attacking the Telephone System. I didn't know, Mr.

Chairperson, how embarrassed the Honourable Member for Lakeside would be when he was Minister responsible for Telephones, and the fact that the Honourable Member for Pembina did nothing to deal with the advent urism and the misguide d direction that was continuing in the Telephone System ranks as significant weakness on the part of the Hon ourable Member for Pembina. He knew - he sat in this Chamber and he heard the exposure of the 3929

Thursday, 16 July, 1987 Telephone System - but he did nothing about it. So let the record be very, very clear, Mr. Cha irperson, that the incomp etence of the Honourable Member for Pembina is at the root of the continuing problem that the Telephone System had. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Economic Security. HON. L. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Member for Pembina asked for an explanation of the $9.4 million requested for the Manitoba Data Services Incorporated, and I can advise him that it breaks down generally into two parts: $3.4 million which is for the Capital Expansion Program that has been going on for some time. This is generally upgrading their computer facilities, expanding and upgrading their computer storage capacity and the purchase of new computer software, and there's a lot of information here on the various kinds of equipment, but it's generally for the expansion of the basic facili ty.

I mi ght advise honourable members tha t the organization continues to play an expanding role in government, because of computerization that's taking place. Revenues have expanded in spite of reductions in rates that have been appreciated every year. There is a very positive net income flow that has occurred over the years. The other portion, the $6 million, is to support the Burroughs and Unisys based health care ini tiative. This is being done in cooperation with the Manitoba Health Services Commission, which has the responsibility for bringing forward computerization of

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-2-91
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 2nd hansardpdf 91.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	48360a85da0a8601c0d90118820e23dcb732858f

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