Manitoba Hansard — 25 May 1987 (Sitting 54B, 33rd Legislature, 2nd Session)

33-2-54b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 25 May, 1987. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Baker: Call the committee to order. In this

section of the Commit tee of Suppl y, we'll be dealing with the Estima tes of the Muni cipal Affairs Depart ment. Let us begin with the statement from the Min ister, please. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. We'll just begin by a few introduc tory remarks. First of all, I'd like to present the Estima ted Expenditures for the Department of Mun icipal Affairs for the 1987- 88 fiscal year.

Members have already received copies � of the Supplementary Information which accompanies ' the Mu nicipal Affairs Estimates, and copies of our 19 85- 86 Ann ual Report, which supplies members with program information. Muni cipal Affairs' primary clientele remains the 200 municip al corporations outside the City of Winnipeg, and the elected and appointed decision-m akers who manage local government affairs. Last October's municip al elect ions saw the departure from muni cipa l government of many ded icate d municip al serva nts, either through disinclination to stand for office, or through defeat at the polls.

It saw the defeat through the electoral process of aspiring mun icipal leaders and it saw an equal number of new faces chosen by the local electorates to carry on the firml y entrenched tradition of progressive local government in Manitoba. I congratulate all candida tes, those successful and those unsu ccessful, and those who have stepped aside to let others take their place. The willing ness to run for public office and to serve municip al and community � in terests ind icates a strong commit ment to the ' dem ocratic process.

It would be remiss not to public ly recognize the contributions made by Manitoba's appointed officials. They are the people who provide day-to-day services which are, for the most part, uns een and often taken for granted. It would be app ropriate at this time, also to ack nowledge the long and strong tradition of cooperation, consultation, and commu nication which have characterized ongoing rela tionships with the Union of Manitoba Mun ici palities, the Manitoba Association of Urban Mu nicip alities, and the Muni ci pal Adminis trators' Association.

Such continuing di alogue augers well for the provincial-municipal partners hip, and I'd like to thank those organizations and their executives for their participation in the continuing and wide-r anging di scussions of mutua l concern and int erest. This year marks a century plus one of the municip al provincial partners hip. In 18 86, The Muni cipal Act was approved, consolidating all previous legislation affect ing munici palities. Mun ici pal legislation has evolved according to economic, social and technological change, and will continue to evolve to accommoda te the future.

Mu nici pal Affairs is proud of its past traditions of service and looks forward to working with its municipal partners to addr ess the needs of today and of tomorrow. My department has provided the liaison linkage between the province and its municipal partners for the past 10 0-plus years. This linka ge has been forged , in part, by the strong leadersh ip shown by senior department executive. My Deputy Mi nis ter, Gerry Forrest, is present today, as are some of the branch directors, or they will be. The overall Estima tes for Muni cipal Affairs show a modest increase of 5. 1 percent.

However, dir ect grants to municipal corporations are up 12.3 percent - a substantial rise. The most significant increase is in grants in lieu of taxes - close to $3 million. Members are well aware that estimating grants in lieu is a variable exercise, which depends on municipal mill rates, acquisition of properties by the province, and the results of reasses sment in the City of Winnipeg. Memb ers will note that projected handi- van and regular transit grants are down.

This decrease reflects increased ridership and lower fuel costs, indi cating higher recovery costs for the commun ities involved in exten ding public transit to their citizens. Centennial grants which support municipal birthda y celebrat ions are projected to remain at last year's level . This year, the Rural Munic ipalities of Ochre River, Riverside, and Coldwell are celebrating hundr edth birthdays. I extend warmest of birthday greetings and wish them continued prosperity and progress in the century to come. Closer to home, the R.M. of Gimli has spaced centennial events and celebrations throughout 19 87.

I am pleased to take

part in activities celebrating this very special ann iversary and will be especially pleased to represent the .prov�nce, as well as my constituenc y, at ceremonies on Canada Day, when a bronze plaque commemor atin g a century of settlement will be presented to the munici pality. Police service grants are projected to be lower than last year. At that time, eligible municipalities received first year phase-out payments under the new granting formula. Local government general support grants are projected to be higher this year. Mun icipal Affairs has adminis tered this grant program since its inception in 19 83.

Until recently, however, payments were made through the Department of Finance. Members will note in the Reconciliation Statement, tha t $850,000 is being transferred from Finance to Municipal Affairs to cover the costs of adminis tering local government general support grants in 1986-87. This year, the projected cost has increased by $500,000, for a total allocation of $1 ,350,000.00. Planning grants to planning districts remain at the same level, refle cting the reduced yet steady interest 2357

Monday, 25 May, 1987 and growth in the land use planning district progr am . Overall increases in payments have meant that savings have had to be effected in other sectors of the department's operations . A detailed examination of cost efficiencies is described in the Estimates Supplement. These will be discussed by appropriation . The staffing complement has been reduced by nine staff years . This has been accomplished through retirements and through attrition. I would like to reassure members, however, that Municipal Affairs employees did not lose their jobs as a result of cost reduction measures .

New management strategies and reassignment and realignment of duties can assure Manitoba Municipalities of continuing and ongoing standards of service. Salary increases reflect the current Collective Bargaining Agreement with the MGEA, reclassification, annual increments , and so on. A significant decrease , close to $1.5 million, is illustrated in Appropriation 9, Capital Expenditures . Most of the decrease refers to the provincial financial commitment to the Main Street Manitoba Program which terminated in 1986. Estimated expenditures have dropped from $2 million to $480 ,000.00 .

These funds are committed to those communities which have outstanding agreements with Municipal Affairs for Main Street Uprgrading Programs still under construction . Members will note that Transit Bus purchase grants are up, assisting the City of Brandon to upgrade its public transit system . On the program delivery side, I would like to reassure members that although salary costs have been held to a reasonable increase, and that although operating costs are down slightly - about 1.4 percent - dollars have been committed to high priority policy objectives . One such objective is assessment reform .

I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss with members the strides taken in this area over the past year and project future developments. As members are aware, classification and portioning recommended in the Assessment Review Committee Report are concepts proposed to avoid substantial shifts in taxation from one property class to another when current value assessments are introduced province-wide. Property classification is the cornerstone upon which portioning can be built. The task of identifying the property classes is seen as complete.

Regulations which define eight major classes of property on the basis of the type and use were approved by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council and have come into effect this year. The existence of province-wide levies based on real property values makes it essential that all jurisdictions assess properties in identical procedures. Such consistent approaches to property evaluation are crucial to overall assessment reform goals . Last year I announced that work on preparing uniform standards and guidelines for the actual assessment of property was well under way.

I am pleased to announce that the first joint procedural manual for the valuation of residential property and based on the 1984 cost, will be introduced later this spring . Farm building and commercial property valuation manuals are being field tested and will be published later this year. All manuals will be made available to interested members of the public at production cost. Funds committed to publishing these document s are oontain ed in this year's Estimates . Th e Assessment Computerization Program is progressing on schedule.

This is one step in the reform process which cannot be rushed simply because of the volume of information which must be translated from manual to mechanical formats . To illustrate the magnitude of the task, my department has been told by the provincial computer corporation that once the computerization program is complete, Municipal Affairs will move from somewhere around 20th on their list of users to somewhere in the top five .

When members consider that the top five includes the Manitoba Health Services Commission, Manitoba Hydro and the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation, the size of the task becomes more apparent . Several hundred bits of information for each of the over 500,000 assessment roll entries must be translated to a mechanically readable format. Work is proceeding on the design of the data entry and capture stage of computerization. In this data collection phase, all pertinent information is necessary to evaluating property and producing assessment and taxation rolls will be recorded .

This stage is crucial to the process as all present and future programs will hinge on the information contained in the data bank. New assessment manuals are basically complete . Land and building valuation data, which places current values on the different types of land and buildings, can be ready for feeding into the computer . Review of assessment act provisions is continuing and this year's Estimates commit funds to rewrite the act. As in the past, the public will be kept abreast of the assessment reform measures through a comprehensive public information program.

I'd like to comment briefly on the City of Winnipeg reassessment from provincial perspectives. First of all, I would like to reiterate provincial commitment to assessment reform . The seven-point program which, when fully implemented, will result in a fair and equitable assessment system, is well on schedule. Assessment rolls have been updated with all property information. Internal assessment branch reorganization is consolidated; research is continuing. Earlier in these remarks, I noted the status of the legislative, computer, uniform procedures and public information components of the program.

Assessment reform as introduced, offers a process and not an end result to achieve the above-stated objectives. However, the processes had to accommodate the court-ordered reassessment of the City of Winnipeg. This has necessitated that relief be extended to the city to ameliorate the potential effects of taxation shifts from one property class to another. Last year, this Legislature approved Bill 57, allowing the city to set differential mill rates as a temporary measure to alleviate the impact of the court-ordered reassessment on Winnipeg ratepayers.

The introduction of the eight major property classifications have given the City of Winnipeg officials the basic tools with which to do their job. The right of property owners to appeal their assessment on certain grounds to their municipality, is basic to democratic societies. The 1987 amendments to The City of Winnipeg Act will place city ratepayers 2358

Monday, 25 May, 1987 in a position to comp are their assessment with assessments on similar property throughout Winnipeg. I'm pleased to annou nce also tha t additional appointments to the Muni cipal Board will help allevi ate some of the appeal burden the city antici pates as a result of reassessment. Such amelio rative efforts have come about through consultation and cooperat ion. Municipal Affairs has pursue d this consulta tive, cooperative approach throughout the years. The land use planning program attests to the success of such appro aches.

Since 19 76, when municip alities were encour aged to join their neighbours in planning di strict resources, 66 muni cipalities have chosen to work together in 24 di stricts. Growth in district formation has slowed, as reflected by land use planning grants, but the int erest remains steady and new districts are being formed annuall y. Mun icipal Affairs' commitment to education and training remains high. A series of training seminars held earlier this year for 269 elected officials attests to this. The municipal seminar in Brandon saw approximately 500 delegates gather to share ideas and concerns.

This coming year will see a continuation of this activity. Fall sessions and early winter sessions are tentatively scheduled for both elected and appointed officials. Our conti nuin g involvement with the certificate program in mu nicipal adminis tration, through Continuing Education at the Un iversity of Manitoba, will see department staff conducting the 19 87-88 program in Mu nici pal Admin istration and Office Procedures. Effective and open lin es of communic ation are tangible goals we in Muni cipal Affairs pursue with our muni cipal partners.

Working together and commu nicating with each other, the province and Manitoba's mun icipalit ies will continue to meet the many chall enges presented. Those are my opening remarks. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Min ister. The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I thank the Min ister for those non-su bstantive remarks and the opening of his Estimates.

I guess that the best comparison one could make is the one in which the Min ister's responsibility in another portfolio where he saw some $58 mill ion of taxpa yers' money through the Public Insurance Corporation be lost and now he's dealing with $41 million. One would ha ve to I think compliment the staff of Municipal Affairs for keeping their Min ister somewhat under control in the handling of taxpayers' mone y in that regard - (Int erjection)- Well, we'll find out, Mr. Chairman, as we go through the Estimates.

But where the Min ister was dir ectly involved as the Chairman of the Board and involved as a board mem ber, the thing was completely in disarray and massive losses of taxpayers' money. I'm not sure as well, Mr. Chairman, if the Min ister is able to conveniently see the di sappearance of municip al records as happened in the Public Insurance Corporation. I would hope the re hasn't been any of the similar activities taking place within the Department of Municipal Affairs. Mr.

Chairman, as well, I am extremely disappointed that the Min ister of Muni cipal Affairs has not tonight laid before us a program which was promised by the Premier during the election campaign of the major cost sharing program on bridge s and mun icipal inf rastructures. I would have thought that having hired the former Minis ter of Municipal Affairs to put bread and butter on his table with taxpayers' money that we would have by now seen at least the report that he had prepared and some positive announcements tonight as to what kind of a program we'd be looking at.

I am not disappointed that we've seen the end to the Ma nitoba Main Street Program, Mr. Chairman. That was a total waste of taxpayers' money and I'll go through that as we get the appropri ate time and I'l l justify the comments that I've just made. As well, Mr.

Chairman, it's a very, very upsetti ng situation when we see the depopulation of rural Manitoba taking place when we have the current Mini ster of Municipal Affairs who should apprecia te the im pact that this will have on the future of our province, the future on how much monies are able to be drawn as far as the government is concerned off the tax or land base. I think, Mr.

Chairman, we're seeing a devastation of rural Manitoba, not only with the farm busine sses and the farm economy the way it is, but with the extremely high-pressure and high-taxation policies that the NOP are placing on people in small business. It is extremely difficult to maintain business in the environment that has been established under this government. You can not continu e to see higher increases in telephone rates, hydro rates, all forms of taxation placed on the backs of the taxpayers and expect them to thrive. They're competing with other jurisdictions which, Mr.

Chairman, is in most cases somewhat easier to compete in. I would have thought we'd have had some kind of major announcements tonight, other than what I would say internal housekeeping programs. Ye s, the computer program is one which is important to upda te and keep the assess ments updated. I don't argue with those kind of technical changes and those kind of in-house housekeeping matters. But there was no announc ement of any major policies or programs that would turn around the depopulation of ru ral Mani toba.

All he is do ing is announcing something like a week ago that, yes, he'll be putting in a phase-in program for those municipalities that have lost populations so tha t they don't feel the shock, that there will be a grant to support them. But the end result is, over a four-year period of time, they'll have to carry the weight of those people that are currently there. As we see a depopulation, there will be fewer people carrying the tax load. I haven't seen any positive announcements from the Minis ter of Muni cipal Affairs, or from the Premier.

The only thing we heard from the Premier, and that was during the electi on: NOP promises top $50 million. This was on March 6, 19 86, and he said in Swan River, "Pa wley told a group of municipal leaders that the NOP would establish a rural development fund to pay half the cost of repairing or building infrastructure in towns and villages." Where is it, Mr. Mini ster? It's over a year later. You've been in government since'8 1. Where have you been? Where are the programs? This is the second time we've had Es tima tes before the comm ittee and no thing developed. 2359

Monday, 25 May, 1987 I'l l continue on, Mr. Chairman. "Linking it to its government's Main Street Manitoba Community Assets Program, Pawley said municip alities would be eligible for 50 percent funding to repair such things as bridges, sewer systems and firehalls. He said the program would go a long way to arresting the decay of services in rural Manitoba." Where is it, Mr. Mi nister? We're over a year from the time that this promise was made. We 've hired the former Min ister of Mu nicipal Affairs to put bread and butter on his table because he is a political hack friend of the current Min ister .

Where is the program , Mr. Chairman? Muni cipalities are waiting. The decay that the Premier talked about is still going on. In fact, the statistics show that there's not only a decay but a depopulation. The chairman of our committee, Mr. Chairman, being a former reeve , kn ows the essential needs and the necessary needs of the municipal bodies. Where is he at? What are they doing, though, Mr. Chairman? They're taking away RCMP services from rural Manitoba and making the muni cipal corporations pick up the costs.

That's what they're doing in the sout hwest corner of the province, transferring the cost from the government to municipal corporations. The very thing that he's so anxious to fight Ottawa on. In fact, if we go to his opening statement at the Municipal Convention last fall - and I'll refer to the press release a little bit later - he said he was cautiously optimistic about the economy of Manitoba, but it was the terrible government that was cutting back on the trans fer payments. Mr. Min ister, you're no better and you've no room to criticize, because you are doing exactly the same thing. You are doing exactly .

A MEMBER: Tell us where. MR. J. DOWNEY: I told you where you're doing it, in the servicing of RCM P services in southw est Manitoba. There are two mun icipalities now picking up RCMP costs because you've reneged, Mr. Min ister, because you and your government have reneged. They're all paying an equal assessment for RC MP except two munici palities are expected to pay extra in the southwest corner of the province. That's where I'm telling you where. A MEMBER: Pay your own way. MR. J. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, the Mini ster can't have it both ways. So what I'm saying to him is he'd better clean up his act.

I would have thought - why haven't we had policies to announce tonight? I mean how many years does it take before we start to see some of the positive results coming out of the Premier's promise? A MEMBER: The next election, Jimm y. MR. J. DOWNEY: Is that what it is? Is it an annual thing that we - or every time there is an election - see false promises. Is that what the name of the game is? Well, I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, it won't wash in rural Manitoba.

There's another one that won't wash as far as I'm concerned and that's this Min ister voting against rural Manitobans having a person, having an individual, on the Electoral Boundaries Commission. I have some interesting letters starting to come in from the muni cipal corporations now and I'll tell you one in particular that the Chairman of this committee will be extremely inter ested in. The questions are being asked, does he represent the NDP party or does he represent the constituency which he comes from?

By a resolution of a municipal ity, I can tell you, this is a little dif ferent kind of a situation when you're in party politics and I think you have to answer, Mr. Chairman, when you go home to your constituency as to who you are represen ting - the constituency or the NDP party. I can tell you you'll go a lot further representing your constituency than you will the NDP.- (Interjecti on)- We ll, I shouldn't give him that advice, should I? It may be a bit of help to the people of the constituen cy.

I'm certainly not out to help the government, but I hope the people of that constituency get a little bit more of a thoughtful ear from their representatives. I have some questions, Mr. Chairman, dealing with some of the appraisals and assessments of which the Min ister is aware. I think there is a matter of activity within a municipal corporation that the community has brought it under quest ion. I hope the Mi nis ter during the Estima tes would have a chance to respond to tha t situation. But I just say, in concluding my opening remarks, Mr.

Chairman, it's a dismal record that this Min ister and this government have, starting with an election promise that there's no sign of anything happening. As well, hiring a political hack friend, the former Min ister of Municipal Affairs, at $55,000 plus expenses and still not prepared to table a report so that the Legislative Comm ittee, when it's time to do it, can deal with what his recommendations are. I would hope the Min ister would have been prepared to table that report tonight. Why isn't it available tonight? I think, Mr.

Chairman, their whole record as far as operating the municipal corporations, they aren't truly reflect ing the wishes of the majority of rural municip al corporat ions in their activities. I'm extremely disappoi nted that the Minis ter didn't have something positive to table here tonight dealing with the relief that we would expect to see on the rural taxpayers of Manitoba and particularly a policy tha t would addr ess the depopulation in rural Manitoba. If it continues to happen, Mr.

Min ister, who do you expect will continue to carry the taxes that you're going to need, or to pay the taxes that you'r e going to need, off of our rural base? Who's going maintain, who's going to put the other 50 percent up, if it ever comes, who's going to put the other 50 percent up? You're going to have to come to your senses, Mr. Min ister. I believe, Mr. Chairman, it's up to him and his government, you and your colleagues, to show some leadership in the field of municipal politics. It isn't there, and we'll look forward to some of the answers that he's prepared to giv e us. I think, Mr.

Chairman, if the Mi nister could outline how he'd like to proceed through the Estimates, we can deal with them in fairly large blocks of these; that would help accommodate some of my colleagues in some areas they want to question as well. Or does he want to be extremely restrictive going line by line? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: No. If you want to go into some detail, I have no problem going page by page 2360

Monday, 25 May, 1987 through the Supplementary Information, if that is the will of the commit tee. MR. CHAIRMAN: What is the wish of the commit tee? Do you want to proceed line by line with the option of having to go back to some thing? You can always go back to some thing, that is the way we dealt with it. MR. J. DOWNEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, let's start going through the Estimate Book on a line-by-line basis. MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, we'll deal with 1. (b)(1). HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Mr. Chairman, can I have my staff with me at the present time? MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I don't think so John. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

A MEMBER: Go from memor y, John, go from mem ory. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I think they'd be most useful in providing the information that this committee wants. Go from memory? Well, I could try. MR. CHAIRMAN: The staff needs no introduction. I think everybody knows them. Did you want to int roduce the other staff? I'll introduce the Deputy Min ister Gerry Forrest, and Gerry can then introduce his staff. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I only have one in troduction to make. My Deputy critic, Mr. Helmut Pan kratz, the Member for La Verendrye. You have started on l.(b)(1), is that the Executive Support? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: Ye s. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, are there any changes in the makeup of the department in that particular area? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: That is the Executive Support. Last year, as you'll note, the appropriation was somewhat less than it is this year, being $307,500 and it's increased to $385,900 this year, principally because of the addition of two staff members. The two staff mem bers here are lodged in the department, but they report to me as the chai rperson of the Comm ittee on Boards and Commissions. MR. J. DOWNEY: I'm not quite clear. What is their purpose? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: The Commit tee on Boards and Commissions is a Cabinet sub-committee, of which I have been the Chair since 1982, and these are two support staff to assist us with a review of virtually all boards and commissions within the province. MR. J. DOWNEY: You're talking about municip al boards and commissions? HON. J. BUC KLA SCHUK: No, I'm tal king about provi ncial boards. I'm talking about boards and commi ssions as appointed by the Province of Manitoba. MR. J. ·DOWNEY: Was there a public annou ncement made that the government was carrying out a review of all the boards and commissions in the province?

HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: An announcement - well, not an announc ement but certainly it was publ ic information sometime, I believe, in early'82, that such a committee was in place and that I was the chairperson of that committee. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, we've had a comm ittee in place since 19 82. Is the Minis ter prepared to give us the results of the study that's been carried out? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: The outcome of the study in terms of reclassification, in terms of remuneration for board members and so on, will be done through a public document by an Order-in-Council within the next three to four months. MR.

J. DOWNEY: So in other words, all boards and commissions have been review ed. Have there been recommendations to delete or to remove any boards or commissions that are no longer functional or needed in the system of operating government? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: There are approxim ately, just guessing, about 300 boards and commissions and the functioning of each of these boards is being reviewed . We have carried out a fairly thorough review of about, I believe, a third of these at the present time.

There have been proposed adjustments in terms of remu neration for board members, some of their responsibilities, not necessarily up, down in many cases as well. The other two- thirds are ongoing and it may well be that some boards and commissions have no longer served a useful purpose. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, if it was established in 19 82, how come it just shows up now in the expendi tures of the Min ister as two individuals? Has it taken him that long to get off the mark? Is that really what the problem is? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Not at all.

The committee was established in 19 82 or so and operated in a very in formal ma nn er, but as of last fal l, we formally unde rtook the review as to the requirements of board mem bers, their responsibilities, whether or not their remuneration was in line with their responsibilities, whether or not that board or commission still has a purpose in being. That formal review was only init iated last September. MR. J. DOWNEY: So, Mr. Chairman, the Minis ter ind icated the review which is being carried out will be made public in three to four months? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: The changes in terms of remune ra tions and level of responsibilities will be done through a public document by way of an Order-in Council. MR. J. DOWNEY: I appreciate that. Will the review be made public? 2361

Monday, 25 May, 1987 HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I would see no problem in tha t once it is completed, but as I ind icated, it is being done on a phased basis, so I won't say the more im portant boards, but certainly boards that have been identified as necessitating review at this time will be dealt with in a matter of three or four months, and the rest will be done over the next year or so. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, so that's the only change, the two support staff? The other support staff that we're talking about, Executive Support would be HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: Those would be in my office and in the Deputy Mini ster's office. MR. J. DOWNEY: Has there been any change there in the last period of time? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: No, the numb ers this year are the same as they were last year. MR. J. DOWNEY: I see, okay. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: I wonder , Mr.

Chairman, whether this would be the proper area, under executive staff, to ind icate the policy direction that the Min ister is taking, and I want to be specific, for example, about what's happening with the local government districts and the cutbacks to the Department of Hi ghw ays, and the cost sharing of the programs. I wonder if the Min ister could indic ate what his position is in terms of the local government di stricts and the cutbacks in the programs that are available to them under the cost-sharing of highways, drainage, etc., the programs tha t used to be 50-50.

A major step was taken this year in terms of now paying only a percentage of the funding that was available to them for that program, where it used to be 50-50. This is only one more step. It's only a year or two ago when the engineering services were deleted from them and if they wanted them, they had to pay for them. I'm just wondering, under the executive aspect of his department, what is his view and what is the direction that he is taking in terms of the local government districts?

I don't think I have to go into the whole background history of what's happening in the local government di stricts, the fact that local governments di stricts like Pine y, for example, 80 percent of their land is Crown lands. I'm sure the Mini ster must be aware and, if not, he will be aware of the fact that the local government districts are banding together and will be asking and approac hing the province in terms of grant in lieu of taxes on Crown lands to offset some of the cutbacks that are taking place.

I wonder if the Min ister could give us a position and the direction that he's planning to take with the local government di stricts? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: The Mi nis ter of Municipal Affairs. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Ye s, I'm certainly aware that there are some LGD's that ha ve expressed a concern about the dir ect ion tha t some departments of government have taken, particularly this spring. I have not met with any but I know that within the very near future, there is a meeting being scheduled to meet with a numb er of LGD's who have written to me asking for a mee ting.

The purpose of the mee ting will be to discuss some of the changes that are taking place and, as I recall, inquiring as to what advantages there might be to them in gaining municipal status. So I'll be listening to their views very careful ly. I will admit that not all LGD's would share that view. There are some that are reasonably well off and there are some that are not that fortunate, but certainly we'll be listening to their views very careful ly. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, is the Min ister indicating to me that he is proceeding with the concept that the local government districts should be, you know, getting full municipal status at this time? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I don't have the correspondence in front of me but that's certainly , as I recal l, one of the items that the LGD's wanted to discuss. MR. A. DRIEDGER: What is the Min ister's position in a case like this?

First of all, I want to ind icate that I'd be very surprised if any local government districts would be promoting the idea of full muni cipal status, especially when you consid er, as you just briefly touched on the fact, that the limit of tax breaks tha t these local government di stricts operate un der, how can they provide these kind of services. I mean, that is one of the reasons why they were est ablis hed as local government districts to begin with, and here we'r e talking about giving them full municipal status.

I want the Mini ster to maybe clarify as to what does he call - the local government districts, where does the scenario come from that they're welcome, because there is a misconception out here, because of the program that was in itiated allowing local government di stricts to sell LGD vested Crown lands, or some of them did that, and built up a bit of a kitty, looking at that as the last little place where they can get funding coming from, to put away. This is one of the rationales that the Min ister of Transportation forwarded, indicating that some of the LG D's had big reserves.

These reserves were accumu lated in the last few years when they managed to sell some of the LGD vested Crown lands. That will never happen again. Here they're looking at that and government, in their zeal for money, look and say, well, these are rich LGD's and now we've got to get our hands on the pot and we've got to cut them down. I would like the Min ister to be a bit more definitive in terms of how he views this whole change taking place, because you can hide behind this, as the Minis ter of Transportation did, or else you can explain exactly which direction you're going to take on it.

This is a serious matter, because the Mi nister himself - I don't know whether he has any LGD's in his area, but those that have, this is a matter of major concern, because 2362

Monday, 25 May, 1987 we are going to be depriving the people least able to defend themselves and to provide services . We're going to take and jump on them and stomp on them further yet . I won der if the Minister could maybe give me his position in this case. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: As I indicated , I have received a letter asking for a meet ing with , and these are represen tatives from a number of LGD 's. I do hope to hold that meeting in the near future .

I'm in the process right now of having info rmation developed for this meeting from a number of departments and we will hear what their concerns are and what their views are . I have no intention of jumping all over any LGD or depriving it of anything, but I do think that we have to face reality and where there may be those LGD's that have considerable assets - because they are not all poor, relative to other municipalities and sometimes neighbouring municipalities - it may well be that they might want to assume a municipal sta tus and we will not stand in the way. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, I'm sure, having that status that he has, as being the responsible Minister for municipalities and LGD 's, is not that naive and he doesn't think for one minu te that anybody else is that naive and doesn 't realize what's going on. As Minister responsible , he knows what's happened and why there is some financial, you know, why some LGD 's have a bank roll right now.

So let the Minister not for one minute try and think that he's kidding anybody in saying, well, these are rich LGD 's because of what happened in the last two or three years, in most cases, where they have a reserve. Because what's happening right now, they are looking at some serious cutbacks and it has serious implications .

I dare say that if the Minister 's going to meet with them , I hope he meets with all the 11 LGD 's affected and gets a proper explanation from them as to the impact that it will have on them and not try and hide behind the impact of meeting with one or two and saying, well, these are requesting municipal status which I don't believe for one minute, because there is no rationale for them requesting municipal status. Obviously, the Minister knows that and, you know , there are many people who understand what the situation is.

What I had hoped from this Minister , that he come forward and say that actually the direction that was taken by the Minister of Highways , and cutbacks there, that he was basically going to try and , you know , plead with the Minister and maybe stand on the side of the LGD's and fight for their benefits to some degree so that there would not be cutbacks, because the cutbacks are taking place right now.

I suspect that under this government , if they follow the rationale that he's sort of just implying a little bit , that we'll have more cutbacks in that area and we're going to be depriving the local government districts of many services which they cannot afford . He is using and his government is using the excuse because they have big reserves that we're going to cut them back. Somehow this government can 't get away from the fact that if anybody has got money , regardless of what the explanation is, they 've got to get their hands on it , that we've got to cut 'em down until finally everybody 's poor. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: It would app ear that the Member for Emerson did not hear th e words "consultative" and " cooperative" in the introductory remarks. I have indicated I've received a request from, I believe , it's 11 or 13 LGD's. I have no intention of hiding from the majority of them. I would wish that each one would be well-represented to present their views on this issue.

We will listen and we will try to accommodate as best we can but , as I say, I'm sure the Member for Emerson is aware that there are some poor municipalities who are looking somewhat enviously at those LGD 's that are being provided with services that the municipalities aren't being provided with . Let's see if we can achieve some sort of equality or equity in the system . We will , after the discussions , be in a better position to make those kind of decisions . MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, why I have little confidence in this Minister's approach is the fact that it's already demonstrated by the fact that they haven 't cut down , and it's not proper to reflect on the Chairman, but I think the Chairman, who has been involved in municipal politics under the director of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities , has made his position known very clearly that he feels that the LGD 's possibly, at times, maybe had more benefits than they should have had. With that kind of influence on the Minister of Municipal Affairs, that is where my concern is at this stage of the game .

The Minister has indicated by his lack of action in the cutbacks to this day that this is a trend that's going to continue . I have very little faith . You can meet all you want, and I hope they do meet with you and express their concerns, but I personally have no confidence that you will change anything around, Mr. Minister . HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Well, I don't know what there is to add. The meeting is upcoming, we will review the situation . I suppose, you know, the Member from Arthur made some remarks before about cutting back in transfer payments .

I suppose that rather than a 9.3 percent increase in the transfer payments this year, which the municipalities legitimately deserve - I'm not arguing with that - we could have cut back to zero percent as has been done in Saskatchewan and we could have afforded all sorts of highways in the LDG's and all sorts of drainage programs . But the fact is that the full impact of the transfer payments is being passed through and whether they be Highways or whether it be Natura l Resources , there is only so much that any department has and it's allocated in as fair a way as is deemed reasonable . MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, I don 't want to belabour this. I just want to indicate that's very poor solace to the LGD's who see what is coming and the Minister doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to ind icate what his plan is for them and the direction that he's going . It's sort of a knee-jerk reaction, you know , and 2363

Monday, 25 May, 1987 then he says "well, yes, we'll be meeting with them." The action is taking place right now and where was he, what were his comments when the LGD's were cut back to the percentage basis that they are right now? In my opinion, it is the first step, and ulti mately that whole thing will cave down and he's ind icated by his remarks that they have big reserves, that that is the reason why this is happe ning. I just hope that when he meets with them that he has, at least, an open mind.

Wel l, they will ind icate what their reaction is with this Min ister, but I personally have very little confidence. I perceive the di rection that it is going based on the influence that is being put on this Min ister and the direction that this government is taking. When they see money they can't help but get inv olved and grab this mone y. It's going to cut down the services to a lot of people who are not in a position to defend thems elves and that is the tragedy of the thing. Thank you. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Under this, I'd like to deal with the contract to the former New Democratic Cabinet Min ister and Muni cipal Affairs Min ister . It ind icates in the contract that the interim reports shall be available on or about January 1. Has the Mi nister asked for any of those reports or has he got any of them available yet, any interim reports? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I have received copies of both final reports, as a matter of fact, which are under review at the present time.

One should keep in mind, though, that the contract between the former Min ister of Muni cipal Affairs and the province is not through the Mini ster of Municipal Affairs, but through the Min ister responsible for the Jobs Fund. I'm not trying to use that as a way of not responding to questions, I just thought that should be cleared up. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the Min ister may not want to respond or he may. We 'll get at it at some point. The Auditor ind icated that there wasn't near enough accountability under the Jobs Fund.

I would hope that he wouldn't want to restrict himself from answering on this particular part because it really ties in with what the public was promised on March 6 of '86 as far as the infrastructure is concerned - probably that's where it should fit in. I'm wondering where else we could debate it. The Min ister has a copy of it. Would he and when will he be providing us with a copy of it? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I would hope that I can di stribute a copy of that within the next week to two weeks. The report is being reviewed at the present time.

When we can be in a position to definitively state which of the recommenda ti ons are going to be accepted , then I think that would be an appropria te time to release the whole report with our undertaking as to how we're going to implement that. MR. J. DOWNEY: Wouldn't it have been a more appropriate time to have it released so we could have debated it during the Estimates of the Department of Muni cipal Affairs? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Well, I would like to respond to that.

To be honest about it, I felt that we wouldn't reach this stage in our Estima tes review until about the first or second week of June, and I would have liked to have had it at that time. MR. J. DOWNEY: So in other words, the Mi nis ter is saying, because the Estimates of his department came up at this particular point rather than another two weeks down the road, he thought he'd be through with it by then. Mr. Chairman, my concern is: When will we get a chance to debate it and see what the recommendations are and to get a chance to have input as Opposition, or are we going to be deprived of that opportunity? HON.

J. BUCKL ASCHUK: Okay, there are, I guess, two responses to that. First of all, as the mem bers have likely gone through the Estimates, they will realize that there is no appropriation or allocation in this year's Estimates for impl ementation of this program. I belie ve I have said a numb er of times that this program, the recommendations that we will be acting on, will not be imp lemented until the next fiscal year.

Secondly , since it is the Min ister responsible for the Jobs Fund that in a sense commissioned these two reports, there may well be an opportunity to deba te the two reports if they are released within the next week to 10 days in his Estimates. MR. J. DOWNEY: So much for the decay in the services in rural Ma nitoba. According to the Prem ier, they were in pretty much decay under his leadership as Premier from'81 until March of '86. We're now at May of 19 87 and it's still another year. So what will arrest the deca y, Mr. Chairman, if the Min ister says it will be at least another year?

That's an introduction to the program. That isn't putting in place the flowing of any funds or any thing like that. Is he not concerned tha t the municipalities need the promised money tha t was promised in 1986, need the support? Why is he delaying it? What is the reason for the delay? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: There is certainly no lack of recognition that the municip alities require support. As the member knows, Mi nis ters of Muni cipal Affairs from all provinces have been addr essing this problem or att empting to discuss this problem with the Federal Government.

Certainly we are on the same wavelength as the municip al bodies are, knowing that it's not a minor problem. It is a very serious problem. It did not start in 1981. It's been with us for decades, and to resolve the problem will take considerable amounts of mone y. While it would be ni ce to have the mo nies to im plement the program tom orrow, this particular proposal that the former Min ister has developed is a five-year program.

Certain ly, when details of it are announced early next month, that will provide the municipalities, municipal bodies with the opportunity to consider what their priorities are and fit it perhaps into a five-year program. This is not a program that's just here for one year and not thereafter. Munici palities will have the opportunity, if they have not already done so, to assess what their needs are 2364 -

Monday, 25 May, 1987 and, based on the program itself as to what the cost sharing might be, they will be in a position to make the decision, what they consider to be their priority and, if they don't have the money in their reserves at the present lime, to accumula te those funds so that project can be undertaken, whether it be a year down the road or three years down the road or whatever. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, so what we're really hearing tonight is the statement that was made by the Premier on March 6, 19 86, was nothing more than a bunch of election garbage, that he was going out and misleading or trying to get the support of the public under false pretences. Really , that is what it's all about. It was important to go out and pay attention to the decay of services in rural Manitoba during the election campaign. We are now well over a year after that, and it will be another year before there is any recognition or any implementation of any program for the support of rural inf rastructure. The point is, Mr.

Chairman, it was nothing more than an election comment and ploy to try to win the seat of Swan River, which I guess probably it was successful if that's the way he wants to be elected. I'll tell you, the next election campaign, the people will be told loud and clear what they got out of that promise and how long it has taken to have anything -(Interjection)- hard work? Hard work, nothing. It took a bunch of misleading statements by the Premier of the Province to do it. A MEMBER: Do you remember the perfect Pete's program? MR. J. DOWNEY: Yes, we'll get into perfect Pete's program. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Please address your remarks to the Chair, please. The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to be stated clearly on the record that there real ly isn't a program going to be introduced. Probably the best guess would be two years down the road before anything will be in place for bridges, fire halls and for inf rastructures for rural municipalities. Would that be a fair guess, or will there be one at all, or will it be into the next election campaign and all we'll get is another headline from the Premier?

When are we going to see a cost-sharing program that was promised by the Premier over a year ago? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Well, I was going to comment before with respect to some of the comments that my critic made in response to mine. I thought, here is a perfect example of a person who wants in stant gratification. Election promises are made du ring campaigns. I don't know where it is written that the promise has to be imple mented the day after the party wins. I think, if you check the NDP record, it's certainly not some thing we are going to hide behind.

The fact is the consultant, the former Mini ster of Municipal Affairs, has spent consid erable time on two very well-developed studies. They are being reviewed at the present time. It would certainly be my hope that we could implement them as soon as possible. I should also mention that, related to the study on municipal in frastructure, is the need for the Federal Government to be a partner. The municip alities and the province cann ot do it alone, tha t is well acknowledged. The Member for Emerson should be listening. This is good.

The Min isters of Municipal Affairs have for the past two years been trying to have a meet ing with the federal Minis ters, a number of Min isters, to show their support for the municipal bodies, particularly the Federation of Canadian Munic ipalities, on the need for a partnership in rebu ilding our infrastructure which is some thing like $12 billion, $15 billion national ly. In Manitoba it, itself, would be in the $750 million range.

I am pleased that, after about two years or three years of efforts, the Chairperson of the Comm ittee of Min isters has had a meeting just in the last month or so with the Mi nis ter of Economic Dev elopment, Mr. de Cotret, and I unde rstand that this will lead to a - the Mini sters will be meeting in Ontario in August and it is hoped that we will have federal represen tation, which is something that hasn't occurred for the past two or three years.

I would like to believe, and I'm going to be optimistic that the Federal Government has started listening, has begun to realize the seriousness of the situation and they, with the municipal bodies and with the provinces, will be partners in helping rebuild our infrastructure. MR. J. DOWNEY: There is no place in this commitment from the Premier that he said anything about the Federal Government, and I'll re-read it for the Minis ter in case his hearing was bad. Now you can't get off that easily , Mr. Min ister. Mr.

Chairman, the comm itment read like thi s: "Linking it to Government's Main Street Ma nitoba Community Assets Program, Pawley said municip alities would be eligible for 50 percent funding to repair such things as bridges, sewer systems and fire halls." I would take it as: 50 percent from the province, 50 percent from the municipalit y. I mean, that's how it reads to me. I don't see anything here saying, if the Federal Government will participate in cost-sharing. No, it doesn't say that. The press release doesn't say that, so all we have is a bunch of political posturing.

Political posturing, misleading the electorate to thinking they are going to get major support from the government after they are elected. Well, Mr. Chairman, now we're hearing them say it's the Federal Govern ment's responsibility to cost-share in the program. Why didn't he say it at the time, that we will first of all negotiate with the Federal Government and if we can have successful negotiations, then we will cost share a program, would have been an appropriate way to put it. That wasn't quite good enough for him at that time; he had to go the full extent of misleading the people of the province.

That's what he's run this province on for the last many years anyway. Mr. Chairman, further on the contract, it ind icates as well that the expenses associated with this contract shall be reim bursed as provided in the General Manual of Admin istration, and the government shall provide office space and clerical support. 2365

Monday, 25 May, 1987 Can the Min ister tell us how much additional money it cost the taxpayers as well as the $55,000.00? What would the other cost be for the hiring of Mr. Anstett, his expenses, office and clerical, all the things that go with that job. What would that cost? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Mr. Chairman, I wish I could provide that information but none of those expenses were borne by our department, so I don't have access to that. The appropria te Min ister to answer would be the Mini ster responsible for the Jobs Fund. MR. J. DOWNEY: What Min ister would be accountable for that? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: I believe it would the Min ister for Indus try, Trade and Technol ogy. As I ind icated before, when his Estimates are up, and I don't belie ve they've been held yet, have they? Then I think that would be a ... A MEMBER: Finished. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: They're finished? Oh, yes, the Jobs Fund is separate, that's right. Just getting back to the 50-50 I want to indic ate to the Member for Arthur that in fact we have had di scussions with muni cipal officials and talked about our hope tha t the Federal Government would be assisting somewhat with the inf rastructure costs.

Now, the municipal officials have told us that if we were able to obtain funds from the Federal Government, that they would still like to go on a 50-50 cost-share. What that means is that if the province had, let's say, $10 million to spend annually on a program, under that proposal that the Premier had used in 19 86, that would give you $20 million worth of inf rastructure wo rk.

However if we could, through some program or other, get an additional $10 mi llion from the Federal Government, which is $20 million, and that was matched by the munic ipalities by $20 million, you would then have $40 million worth of work. The munic ipalities have ind icated they would be willing to do it. I think we should all keep our fingers crossed hoping that there can be some assistance from the Federal Government. I don't know why Manitoba should be the except ion.

All the other provinces are saying the same thing, that we and the municipal bodies cannot afford to unde rtake the massive in frastructure costs tha t are requ ired; and we'r e not being unreasonable. We all realize that a lot of work was done post-war - whether it would be sewer, water - that has now deteriorated, has to be replaced. There have been no reserves set aside for the replacement costs so the municipal bodies are being faced with horrendous costs.

That's why my colleague, the Min ister of Agricultur e, has something like $60 million or $65 million of requests for funding under the Manitoba Water Services Board. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question is to the Minis ter. Is he trying to imply that the Federal Government does not have funds available for local infrastructure? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: My understanding is that the Federal Government stopped funding or stopped assisting infrastructure costs about 19 81 or 19 82. Now there is some funding through the Water Services for rural commu nities, but I'm talking about ...

So we are anxiously awaiting some word as to how they might help. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Well, I'm not going to try and put your supp ort staff on the spot, but the Federal Government, through their ARDA Program, which you have, through di fferent departments - such as, for instance, Recreation and dif ferent sources made use of the funding. There is mone y available exactly for this water and sewer. My question to you is, even in the House today and also yesterd ay, it became quite apparent that the Min ister of Agriculture was indicating that maybe within the next year we would be able to get an agreement.

Well, it's quite obvious that it's the Provincial Government's reneging on theirs because the federal funding is available. There was over a billion dollars put into the Western Water and Sewer ARDA Program, which is available through agreement naturally , which the Province of Manitoba's reneging on at the present time in order to receive a portion of.

And there are communities like Steinbach and Stonewall I believe and other community centres waiting for this funding, which I believe this Province of Manitoba doesn't have the funding of their own to be put up; and now they are again trying to stonewall the project and blaming the Federal Government. I'd like to hear the Mini ster's actual response to that. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: What the Member for La Verend rye has just told us is certainly news to me and it appears to be news to my Deputy Min ister, and I'm sure it must be one of the best kept secrets in Manitoba.

If you have some specific information about some program that we appear not to know any thing about, we would really appreciate receiving tha t information. It could solve some headaches. MR. H. PANKRA TZ: To the Mini ster, the Tourism Program, which is a $60 million cost-sharing - $30 million of each - is through the ARDA Program.

That same program has also monies for infrastructu re, the same ARDA Program, and I am lead to believe that it is that same program that in 19 81, 19 80, and maybe the Deputy Min ister can inform me because I'm sure he's maybe more aware of it than the Minis ter is, that is the same program where municip alities received funding from years ago, through the same ARDA Program. It's this Province of Manitoba that I'm led to believe that is not rene ging, that is not renewing that same program. Now I might be wrong on that but that's what I've been led to believe. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: First of all, the tourism program is a $30 million program, federal -provincial, but it ... MR. H. PANKRATZ: No, it's 60 million, 30 each. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: No, it's 30 in total. MR. H. PANKRATZ: 15 each? 2366

Monday, 25 May, 1987 HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: We ll it's 60-40, whatever it may be, depending on the - is it 50-50? But it's extremely targeted and it's ind ustry-related. Therefore, that money can only be used if you're developing some new tourism project or tourist-related project, but it will not help the La Broqueries or the Steinbachs or wh atever, unless something is . . A MEMBER: No, that's tourism. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: That's tourism, that's right.

With respect to the other program, my deputy confirms that there was a two-year program termina ted in 19 81, and the proper title is the Communi ty Services Contribution Program. There has been no replacement for that program for the past six years, unfortuna tely, but at that time it did assist considerab ly. It was a national program with $20 million annually to Manitoba. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Well, this tourism program, which is now - I'm not going to question whether it's 60 or 30, but it was a 50-50 program.

That's through the ARDA program, if I recall it correctly -(lnt erjection) Yes, it is, I'm quite sure of it. There was over $1 billion put into Western Canada for that program where infrastructure for communities could also apply for it. Has this province applied for that funding within the last two or three years? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I am simply not aware of the program that is being di scussed. I do know that there is a program that Saskatchewan has entered into a few years ago.

It's a su bagreement under ERDA and I don't know what the dollar figure was, but I believe that the Province of Manitoba, through the Min ister of Agriculture, is working on something of that nature at the present time. I don't know how close we are to reaching some sort of an agreement, but I do know I've been at a num ber of agreement signings where the Min ister has raised this, expressing optimism that we were not too far away. So I would hope tha t it does materialize. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Could the Mini ster of Muni cipal Affairs then indi cate under what program this new funding would take place? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: The funding from the Federal Government? It would be a subsid iary under - well, it would have to be similar to Saskatchewan, because we're not that unlike. I don't know the exact program. I should mention that I have read a number of times in the Interlake papers, comments by the federal mem ber, Felix Holtmann, making some reference to some sort of inf rastructure program. He has, as an MP, and his committee or whatever have subm itted some proposals to the appropriate Minis ter, but we have not seen anything that has come back.

Again, we're hopeful that, one of these days, something will be announced. MR. H.

PANKRATZ: Well, it is unfortuna te that the Minis ter doesn't know of the federal programs that are avai labl e, quite ob viou sly, because I have got docum entation in my room which I would have brought along if I would have been aware of the fact, which 2367 states - and I have dis cussed it with the Mini ster of Agricultur e as well - that through the ARDA program for water and sewer, for infr astructure for commun ities is available and that the Province of Manitoba, due to their shortage of funding naturally - and the Min ister of Labour isn't here, the $28 million loss.

Naturally through that, the province is short of funding and naturally is cutting back wherever they can. So in the meantime, they're going to be doing studies which cost the province $55,000 to hire the previous Mi nis ter and so forth. But I'm very surprised that the Min ister of Municipal Affairs is not aware of the fact tha t the funding is available from the Federal Government, and that actually is a disgr ace to the Province of Manitoba.- (Interjection)- I've got the floor, Mr. Chairman, I wish you'd recognize that. I don't belie ve that the man has the . . . MR. D. SCOTT: Don't let them push you around.

MR. H. PANKRATZ: That's right, Don, thank you. So with that I would like the Minis ter of Municipal Affairs to state directly whet her there isn't funding through the ARDA program for the Province of Manitoba for infr astructure, and I have yet to hear him say that there isn't. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I know in commit tee where these Estima tes reviews always reveal some surprises, and this is a surprise to me, because I can say, in all honesty, I have not heard of that program.

As a matter of fact, what I have heard is the Minis ter of Finance, Micha el Wilson, saying that it was not the Federal Government's responsibility to provide funds towards infrastructure costs. I have seen the Honourable Tom McMillan pretty well say about the same thing.

So if there's $1 billion out there that is begging for a home, I can assure you that, if we could have an agreement where the province and the Federal Government would contribute and the municipal bodies would match that which means that, for every 25 cents the province put in, there would be $1 worth of economic activity or rebuilding of infr astructure, we would jump at that chance. But I am not aware of that program; it's never been brought to my attention. But if you have some lit erature that we should be reviewi ng, I would very much appreciate seeing that. MR. H. PANKRATZ: One final question, Mr. Chairman.

Under what program was the previous funding from the Federal Government to the Province of Ma nitoba made available? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: It was a Community Services Contribution Program. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I would like the Minis ter to ind icate if he ha s currently got any agreement with the former Min ister, Andy Anstett, by contract or any other work being carried out by his department and the former Min ister? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I will admit that neither I nor, to the best of my knowledge, any department has

Monday, 25 May, 1987 any contract with the former Minister of Muni cipal Affairs at the present time. MR. J. DOWNEY: Will he be carrying out, meaning the Mi nister through you, Mr. Chairman, to the Min ister, has he got any other reviews or investigations of the type he talked about on the boards and commissions by his department? Is there any contractual work being provided outside the departmental SMY's that are reported in the Estimates? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: I believe the only study that may be taken by the department within our allocation this year will be the Systems House Consulting Project on the computerization of our assessment records. There was no provision nor any consideration at this time that there will be any other consulting required. MR. J. DOWNEY: Pass that one. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (bX1)-p ass; 1. (bX2)-pa ss. 1. (cX1) - the Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, there's an incr ease of one SMY in this particular area. What's that for? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: I belie ve that is the support staff for the secretary for Hu man Resource Management. MR. CH AIRMAN: 1. (c)(1) - pass; 1. (c)(2)- pass. 1. (dX1 )- pass; 1. (dX2)- pass; 1. (eX 1) - pass; 1. (eX2) pass. We now move into No. 2. Mun icipal Board (a) - the Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the Mi nister has indi cated in some of his press releases that he's increased the size of the Mun icipal Board to 20, I believe it is, from the 12 and the reason being that there would be an in crease in work activ ity.

The City of Winnipeg's Board of Revision expects between 7,000 and 10 ,000 formal complaints as a result of recent reassessment. It's expected that many of the Board of Revision decisions will be appealed to the Muni cipal Board. Is that in fact taking place at this time? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: My understanding is that I belie ve something like 11 ,000 appeals have been lodged with the City of Winnipeg. I don't have any idea how many of these will eventually go to the Muni cipal Board. There have been no hearings held. I don't imagine they'll be held for another month or two. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, I've got two concerns. One is that, it would seem something is wrong in the system or someth ing's wrong someplace, if 7,000 to 10, 000 have to come to the Mun icipal Board to be heard. I mean that's a lot of appeals, and to cause that to happen, the Muni cipal Board is a qu asi-judicial board, if I'm correct, and a fairly impo rtant board I would think. I would like to know why that is, in fact, the case that they projected so many, and I'd also like to know how many have come to the Municipal Board to date?

He may know what has come to the city, the assessment appeal, but how many have come to the Municipal Board to date? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I had indi cated that I believe about 11 ,000 appeals have been lodged with the City of Winnipeg. Under the legislation that we passed earlier this spring, the City of Winn ipeg taxpayers will have until June 12 to appeal the assessments - and I suspect that a good number of property owners are simply going through this process to make sure that they haven't lost the option of going to the Board of Revision.

The appeal to the Municipal Board will be from decisions made by the Board of Revision. There have not been any so far. I don't know - it would be very difficult to ind icate at this time what we would project. We do feel that there will certainly be some. This will be the first time that City of Winnipeg assessment matters can be appealed to the Muni cipal Board. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, how does the Min ister go about selecting the people he puts on the Muni cipal Board? Does he talk to the municipal councils or does he go to the Union of Muni cipaliti es and ask for recommendation?

How does he go about establishing who he appoints to the Mun icipal Board? He hasn't had, Mr. Chairman, any appeals to the Municipal Board on what he perceived would be a major workload; how does he go about appointing them and why would he be so anxious to be ready for this onslaught of appeals which really , to this point, haven 't appeared to material ize? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: First of all, they are not paid until they actually do the work of sitting as Municipal Board members. I guess, to be aboveboard, we use the Warner Jorgenson method of filling boards and that's not high.

We approach any given number of people for -(Interject ion)- We would certainly make inquir ies from various sources, as to who might be appropriate people to sit on a municipal board, after reviewing their qu alifications, their experience, their knowledge. A recommendation is made for the Min ister and the members are appointed by Order-in-C ouncil. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I'm just wondering, he makes refe rence to the fact that they aren't paid unl ess they perform a duty or work. He hasn't added these additional people just to sit around. Do they not take

part in some of the other activities of the Muni cipal Board hearings, or are they just waiting to do the assessment appeals; or do they now not intermix with the other board - the already appointed board - and partici pate in some of those decisions that have to be made? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: The members who were newly appointed, and I believe they were virtually all from the City of Winnipeg, were appointed for the purpose of hearing appeals from City of Winn ipeg residents.

It may well be, and I would hope, as a matter of fact, that the Chairman of the Municipal Board is using some of these newly-appointed members in appeals to give them a bit of experience as Mun icipal Board members. I can't say if that, in fact, is being done for all the appointees. 2368

Monday, 25 May, 1987 MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, when it doesn't material ize that the numb ers that were perceived to come forward to appeal, is he prepared to reduce the size of the Muni cipal Board when that doesn't happen? HON. J. BUCKL ASCHUK: The Munici pa l Board members are appointed for a period, I believe of one year to the end of Decem ber , and certainly the composition of the board is reviewed annual ly. If there is no need for that numb er of Mu nicipal Board members, then we will take the appropriate steps by reducing the membership. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, dealing with the Municipal Board and some of their activities; have there been many areas in the province dealing with planning that have gone before the Muni cipal Board? What is the record of the province or record of the planning boards throughout the province dealing with the Mu nicipal Board, in hearings that have come before them? The reason I bring it up, Mr. Chairman, I've had several complaints dealing with some of the areas, and I'm wondering what the Min ister has, as a record, as far as Mu nicipal Board and hearings are concerned. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: I'm sorry, I don't quite know the exact or specific information the Member for Arthur is requesting. But the Annual Report of the Muni cipal Board does, I belie ve, have a table of the nature of the hearings . . . MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I can be more specific and I'l l refer to the hearing num ber. It's the notice of hearing No. 217 8 dealing with the Rural Mun icipality of Swan Rive r. What was the outcome on that particular · hearing? Could the . . . HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Does the Member for Arthur have a da te on that one; I don't . . . MR. J.

DOWNEY: Well, maybe the Member for Swan River can help me out on this one. He's not up-to-date with what's happening in his constituenc y, Mr. Chairman, but that's all right. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Mr. Chairman, that was almost as bad as 21 34 from the R.M. of Arthur, as I recall. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the date was about the time I was in that area and it was Wednesd ay, April 29, I belie ve it took place, so if the Min ister could check it out, I would appreciate it. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I'll take that question as notice and certainly will respond and report back to this committee. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, as well, the Min ister has received, as I have, copies of a petition from the R.M. of Ethelbert, dealing with some use of funds within the municip ali ty. Could the Min ister give us an update? I had written to him sometime ago as to what the current situation is dealing with the accusations and the concern 2369 of the citizens who signed the petition. They were fairly serious accusations and I know tha t the Min ister ind icated he was dealing with it, but I'd like to know where it's at, at this particular point. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: Ye s, I'm quite aware of the petition from some of the residents from the R.M. of Ethelbert. I should ind icate not only the Member for Arthur received this, but I also received some subsequent letters from indi viduals who had signed that petition, wishing to have their names removed from that petition. Nonetheless, my response, and I believe I sent a copy, to the effect that the Auditor would review the financial situation of the municipal ity, and once we received the report from the Aud itor, we would then determine what could or had to be done.

My recollection, and I'm sorry, I don't have the file here, is that there was confirmation that there were consi derable expen di tures, to the best of our knowledge, all legitimate expenditures by the outgoing council, which resulted in the municip ality having an ind ebtedness of around $200,000-plus.

The Municipal Affairs' staff have been meeting with the officials of the R.M. and I recall seeing correspondence with a proposal that the in debtedness be amortiz ed over the next three or four years; at least some option was being worked out which would I think result in a mill rate requirement of about 23 or 26 mills for each of the next three or four years to pay off tha t debt. The allegat ions were tha t there were some questionable expenditures made. My understanding is that they were legitima te, but perhaps over exuberant councillors. MR. J.

DOWNEY: What's a legitimate, over-exuberant councillor who would run up a $200,000-and-some bill? Mr. Chairman, just to compl ete my questioning on this, will the Minis ter be prepared to provide a copy of the Auditor's report and how it's handled, the final outcome of what's happened in that particular situation? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Ye s, we certainly will.

Incidental ly, when I used the word "exuberant," I meant that the councillors, I understand, saw some programs that they felt they could avail themselves of, and I believe they used these programs and in the process created some ind ebtedness which has created the problem . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for La Verendrye. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question to the Min ister is with regard to this Municipal Board. Is there any recourse with regard to a decision by the board?

Once the board has made a decision, is there any recourse that the property owner or, for that matte r, anybody else would have in that matter? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: When the Muni cipal Board deals with development plans or qu est ions of ann exat ion, wha t they are provi di ng are recommendations to the Min ister. When they are dealing with qu estions involving subdivision approvals or assessment-rel ated issues, those are decisions of the board.

Monday, 25 May, 1987 As with any board, when there is a question as to whether or not that board has exceeded or erred in jurisdiction, exceeded its jurisdiction, then that matter can be appealed to the courts. So recommendations in the case of development plans and annexation, decisions in cases of subdivision approvals and assessments, questions of jurisdiction, can go to the courts. MR. H. PANKRATZ: What the Min ister is telling me, then, if there are recommendations to the Min ister with regard to planning and so forth, that's a decision by the board, which basically is final.

Is that right; am I understanding that correctly from you, Mr. Minis ter? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: In terms of subdivision approval, those are decisions. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Those are decisions. They're final? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: They're final. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Would the Mi nis ter have any input or any discussions with the board beforehand in regard to before the board would be making their decisions in that respect? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: This Min ister has never discus sed a single matter that has appeared before the board before it makes a decision or recommendation. MR. H.

PANKRATZ: Are these board members - they're all political appoi ntees; am I right? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: All board mem bers are appointed by an Order-in-Council by Cabinet, yes. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the only one thing I can't figure out is why, with the Min ister making such an expansion to the board, expecting such an overload of appeals, he hasn't increased the amount of funds which the board has to work with.

Either the statement doesn't hold much or there isn't very much accuracy to the amount of appropriation that he's making available for the Muni cipal Board. He's increased it by a num ber of 80's. He's expecting an onslaught of 7,000 to 11 ,000 or 10, 000 hearings, yet he's still got basically the same amount of money in the operation of the Municipal Board. He can't have it both ways. Mr. Chairman, if it's ju st to help the politi cal appoi ntees on the Muni cipal Board, then we don't need any more money in there; it doesn't matter. But it's just a little bit of inconsis tency that has to be pointed out. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: No, it's no t really an inconsi sten cy, but at the time the Estimates were being prepared, we only had a board of 12 mem bers. The decision to incr ease it to 20 was only made about a month or two ago and we have no idea of how many appeals will be heard by this board. It's not unrealistic to expect that if there a considerable number of hearings, that whatever funds have been allo cated will be insufficient and we will have to . MR. J. DOWNEY: Special Warrant. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: . . . or elsewhere. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(a)- pass; 2.(b)- pass.

Resolution No. 11 0: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceed ing $338,600 for Muni cipal Affairs, Municipal Board, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1988 -p ass. We now move on to

section 3, Municipal Advisory and Financial Services, 3.(

a) Salaries - the Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, this is an area that I'd like to deal with and try and get from the Min ister what his plans are. I touched on my opening statement my concern about the de-population of rural Manitoba. This, I notice, is where the grants in lieu of taxes to the mun icipalities and other adjustments - general support grants - and the whole area of, basical ly, the amount of money that muni cipal corporations depend on from the government, from the senior government, for support.

Can the Minis ter giv e me any kind of a policy outline or an outline as to, other than the little brief press release he put out on it, that he's not going to see a shortfall this year, a drop in the support this year because of a muni cipality losing its population? Does he have a longer term program in mind or in place, planned, either through municip al hearings or hearing with his department staff and municipal corporations to come to grips, No. 1, with the de-population problem.

And has he recommended to his Cabinet colleagues a change in some of the policies that will reverse the loss of people in rural Manitoba? He has as much responsibil ity, if not more, than his colleagues representing some of the rural portfolios, Mr. Chairman, to come up with some kinds of solutions. I would ask the Min ister under this section, what his plans are. Does he have any policies that are positive to re-populate rural Manitoba?

I know that the old, basic way of re-population or developing population is fairly easy to understand, but I'm wondering if he has any -(Interjection)- No, I mean through the farm indu stry, basically . We ll, I'm sure the Min ister's mind was wandering, there. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: It was; it was. MR. J. DOWNEY: I'd better bring him back to reali ty. There was a gleam in his eye there for a minute. That's pretty hard to get. No, Mr. Chairman, to the Minis ter, I am concerned about it and when you see the last statistics that have come out that have seen a de-population of 60 percent 2370

Monday, 25 May, 1987 of the R.M .'s, has he got a formula developed to deal with it or has he got a policy to try and change it? Where are we at as far as his government is concerned and he, as the Mi nis ter of Municipal Affairs, when it comes to dealing with this whole area of loss of people and programs to deal with it? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Wel l, I think the member for Al bert has identified a . . . MR. J. DOWNEY: Al bert is Arthur's brother. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Arthur, I'm sorry. MR. J. DOWNEY: Albert is Arthur's brother. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: . . . has identified a very serious problem but I'm not so sure that the Department of Mu nicipal Affairs is the sole department to resolve those difficulties. I will admit that we have considered this and I will be raising this as an issue with the advisory commit tee, which has representation from the muni cipa l organizations, as to whether a continua tion of grants according to the present formula is the proper way of doing it. How do we deal with the question of rural de population and at the same time support municipal organizations?

We are doing it on a per capita basis but when your population decreases, of course, their income decreases. How do you protect services? These are some things that we will be discussing with the representatives of the municipal bodies. It will not be a problem that is solved six months down the road or as the result of a meeting two months . down the road or six months down the year. It's an ongoing problem that will require continual review. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, I'm asking if he has any thoughts or input into any type of program which would encourage the industrial development of some of our rural areas or tax in cent ives for rural development. .. Mr. Chairman, l know that, for example, in one province west of us there is a program recently introduced this spring in their budget to - it's a seed money program that encourages the development of some light er type in dustries in some of the outlying areas.

I know that in certain cases some government policies, and I know as a member of a government who belie ved in de-centralization of government agencies and programs, that the move of the Water Services Board to Brandon was the type of policy that was de-centralizing as far as I was concerned. I'm asking if the Minis ter ha s any id eas or recommendations that would help some of the rural, small town communi ties - the rural R.M.'s - with the encouragement of light ind ustry or diversification type ind ustries for the agricultural community that's out there? Does he have any thoughts or ideas in this regard?

I just would look for some kind of at least the glimm er of hope in the Min ister if he's at all in terested. I'm not talking about the Main Street Manitoba Program which just cost the taxpa yers mone y. I'm thinking of something that would contribute to the long 2371 term jobs and stabil ity of econ omic growth and development which would lessen the load for some of the individuals who are still out there carrying the tax load. Does he have any thoughts or ideas or am I drawing a blank on this one, too? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: Wel l, his latter comment about Main Street Manitoba may have cost the province money - no one has ever denied that, but it was a program through which the muni cipalities and the local busine sses and the province contributed to upgrading Manitoba's Main Streets and many small busine sses in those rural com munit ies did benefit from that program. I think one would find it hard to deny that.

The problem of rural Manitoba, the de-population, the change in demographics - and that's why I smiled before when the Member for Arthur had talked about how do we increase the popuUeof rural Manitoba - but certain ly, and he said something about, whoever knows how to do it, of course they do. Through a number of departments, whether it be regional dev elopmemt corporations, they certai nly have a function, and that is being assisted through the Department of Busi ness Dev elopment. The Business Development Department, itself, with some programming that they have in place or may put in place.

The Department of Agriculture, certainly this year through the $12 million contribution towards offse tting education taxes will have some positive impact on rural Manitoba. With respect to the programs that our department admini sters, we are always willing to sit down and listen to the municipal councillors and hear their views. I know the Member for Arthur und erstands as much as I do - we both live in rural Manitoba - that it takes a lot for smaller industries to locate away from major population centres and it will take a lot of effort. MR. J. DOWNEY: To refer to the press release of May 8, Mr.

Chairman, where we see the Min ister said the basic per capita payment will increase by 9 percent to $33 for 1987 compared to $30.25 for 1986, is that what we're going to continue to see have to happen, tha t as we see a continued de-population that we're going to have to see - and is he going to support an in crease in the per capita grants tha t is provided to the mun icipalities over the longer term? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Per capita grants reflects the in crease in the tax revenue to the province from the income tax, the 2.2 points on personal and 1. 0 corporation tax.

As those increase, and as long as the Municipal Advisory Commi ttee is in agreement that is a fair way of sharing those taxes, we will continue to increase them. However, if they in their widsom can convinc e us that there is an even more fair way of doing it, we are prepared to lis ten and to impl ement. MR. J. DOWNEY: That's what I'm concerned about, Mr. Chairman.

Is the Min ister prepared to meet with, or will he be having a series of hearings, or what formal process is he planning to set up that will deal with the loss of population in some of these munic ipalities to make sure they get their fair and equitable share, to maintain their programs because they, in a lot of cases, are locked into support programs as well.

Monday, 25 May, 1987 What I'd like to know is, what process is he putting in place that will deal with it? He's given the assurance that it will be maintained for 19 87. What about the ensuing years? Although he leaves some comment I believe that these transitional adjustment payments will be phased out over the next tour years, that means to me that there will be a reduction, that he's going to maintain it in 1987, but over the next four years there will be a reduction phased in, a lowering of support phased in is how I read that. Is that correct? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: The decrease will be phased in so it doe sn't create any hardships for the municipalities, but my understanding is that what we have, the position we've taken in 1987, is entirely consistent with the position over the policy that's been around for a number of decades. This is a matter that we will dis cuss with the Municipal Ad visory Commit tee.

If it is deemed to be an issue from their perspective, then I'm sure they will have some suggestions as to how we could remedy the problem and we will take that matter under review and undertake whatever action is required to bring about an equitable sharing of these tax rev enues. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I ag ree that he's moved this year not to have any economic hardship, but next year and the year after there will be an economic hardship because he's phasing in a lowering of support over the next four years.

Yes, it may not have the shock this year , 1987, but there will be lower support provided for the next four years. What I'm saying is, what can he do or what is he prepared to do to see that that doesn't happen? That's the longer term policy and that's the longer term formulas that have to be established; and I'd like him to assure us and the municipal corporations that he's going to be dealing with it in a responsible manne r, not wait until 1987 ends and then it's 1988 and they start taking the shock of lower support from the province.

I ask the Mini ster, what mechanism or what is he prepared to do to meet with them to have input from the municipal corporations. If it's strictly the advisory council of municipalities, then I'm prepared to accept that, but as long as he activates that and gets on with it very shortly. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Wel l, it certainly will be on our agenda because we have a number of issues we want to discuss with the advisory commit tee, but I think the memb er is making a bit of an error. MR. J. DOWNEY: It wouldn't be the first one, John. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: I regret I don't have the preliminary Slats Canada figures here but, while there have been decreases, they may not be as dramatic as some of us think they are. We have said that this year, to avoid any hardship, the levels will be frozen at the previous years, as a minimum. Now next year, let's assume that the tax revenue increases by 2 percent or 3 percent, so they'll be benefiting on one side while they'll be phased down, and the fact is, the di fference may not be that substantial. I don't know what the resolution is.

Do we then take away from those municipalities, vil lages or towns, who are having an increased population, so that we can support ones that are having a decrease on a higher per capita? That's a tricky question and that's certainly something I'll be waiting for the advisory council to provide us with some views on that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for La Veren drye. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Yes, my question is in regard to the Urban Transit Grant. Why is the Urban Transit Grant down? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: That is line number? MR. H. PANKRATZ: (d), 3.(d). HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Okay.

As I indica ted in my opening statement, my und erstan ding is tha t the ridership is up, the operating costs are down and the province contributes a percentage of the operating costs. While the ridership is up and I believe fares have in creased, it's 50 percent of actual operating deficits. As the ridership is going up, as the fares go up, then the oper ating deficits decrease - we hope - and therefore the provincial contribution which is 50 percent of that, decreases. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Wel l, hopefully you're right with what you're trying to explain.

I couldn't quite accept that, but my next question will be to police. Why the reduction in the Police Services Grant? That's 3(f). HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: As the member is aware, there is an agreement, I suppose, in place through which the province will assist those municipal bodies with policing costs where their mill rate exceeds the average provincial mill rate. I believe last year it was in the neighbourhood of 17 mills, so if you had a municipal town with a 19 mill rate for its police services, there would have been assistance for the 2 mill differential.

As the overall costs go up, as all muni cipalities are picking up the larger sha re, the provincial portion decreases. Now one has to recall that, through an agreement that I believe was signed by the Attorney General Mercier at the time with Ottawa, there is an ever increasing level of costs that the province must pick up for policing costs, the RCMP policing costs. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Mr. Chairman, to the Mini ster, is this not part of the half mill that is assessed on the muni cipalities? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: The revenues I would think . . . All that 589 . . .

Is that the figure we have for this year anticipated, 548,200 or so? All that figure which will be provided to the various towns and villa ges and so on, approximately 400,000 is reve nue to the province from the half-mill levy. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Wel l , my question is, if the previous year it was 662,200 and now it is 548,200, then why is there a decline in that amount because it's assessed to muni cipalities and distribu ted to the ones that are having a higher levy, an equalization sort of call, and my question to the Min ister would be, where there's a di fference of roughly . . . 2372

; Monday, 25 May, 1987 HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I guess the best way to respond to that would be to refer to Appendix 7, on page 71 in the Supplementary Review, and you will note there that quite a number of villages and town s were provided with a phase-out benefit, which amounted to $114 ,000, in 1985-86; that was part of the policing costs, policy or agreement. That phase-out is no longer in place this year, so there is a reduction of $114,000 that the province will have to pay out to those communities . MR. H.

PANKRATZ: Well, I'm led to believe that it's any municipality that is applying for more than 17 mill s for policing; that is receiving the grant , and anything under is cont ributing . Am I not correct, Mr. Minister ? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Yes, only those municipal jurisdictions that don't have any police force are paying the half mill. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Mr. Chairman , is the Minister then implying that our communities like Steinbach - and I'm using Steinbach just as an example - if they are assessed at the present 13 mills for policing, that they would not be assessed the additional half mill for policing?

Am I correct, Mr. Minister? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Yes, that is correct. MR. H. PANKRATZ: So, Mr. Minister , the municipalities surrounding the communities, they would then all be paying the half mill for policing ; am I correct? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: That is correct . MR. H. PANKRATZ: My next question then is: Why is there still then the $114,000 difference in your Estimates over here, because the same municipal ities would be paying it in respect to what they did the previous year? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Yes, at the time Mr.

Anstett was the Minister, there was a committee with municipal repre sentation and I presume departmental staff. They reviewed the matter of policing costs and my understanding was, there was a recommendation that came out of that committee, that the impact on a number of these communities be buffered through a phase-out program - and it was a one-year or two year - essentially a one-year phase-out program . So what you see on page 71-72 will be the grants that were paid out as a buffer - I guess it's the term we'd use - and then there is no such program in 1987- 88. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I want to deal with the police grants that were referred to in this section. The Municipalities of Winchester and Brenda are participating in an agreement with the Town of Deloraine , to maintain RCMP services that the Provincial Government were prepared to cut out and leave people without protection of life and property; and , I would indicate, to some degree, blackmailed into participating. Has the Minister of Municipal Affa irs or any of his department participated in any of the negotiations or the drawing up of the agreement? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: I'm sorry, I didn 't quite hear the question . But my understanding is whether Municipal Affairs was involved with the municipalities when they signed an agreement. My understanding is that the agreement is between Brenda and Winchester to pick up the cost of one officer , so they're contributing equally; and that Municipal Affairs staff were there to assist the councils with their decis ion. MR. J.

DOWNEY: First of all, is the Minister prepared to provide a copy of that agreement to the members of the Legislature; and secondly, those two municipalities that are now paying for that RCMP protection out of their own funds, are they exempt from the half-m ill assessment on municipal taxes that go to RCMP coverage? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: First of all, our department does not have a copy of that agreement. I believe that would have to be obtained from the Attorney-General , so now I'll take that under review and see what we can do there.

Secondly , the matter of the half mill , that will be something that we will have to discuss with our advisory committee . I would hope, in view of their picking up the costs for the officer , that they would not have to pay that. I would also, I suppose , have to consider whether or not they'd be eligible for a grant if their costs were in excess of 17 mills , or whatever the average is for this year. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Can the Minister perceive where we're headed in this whole business of the type of negotiations and the situation that these municipalities were put in, in Reston and Deloraine , and yes, even his own riding , Winnipeg Beach; that we now have an agreement between the Town of Deloraine, the Municipalities of Brenda and Winchester, the province , the Attorney-General's Department .- (Interjection)- I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman , to the Minister, does he perceive where we're headed?

I mean, yes, it's in Deloraine and Reston and Winnipeg Beach today; where is it tomorrow in the best interests of saving money for the Provincial Government? I would like him to clearly state; he said, yes, he would expect that they wouldn't have to pay their half mill. I have been told , Mr. Chairman, or I think there's been people enter into agreements, that have felt that they wouldn't have to pay a half mill into the Provincial Municipal Affairs Department for the overall policing costs . Now, is that correct or is it not? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: The matter of a half mill , that is certainly something that will be discussed and we will see where that takes us. I think that the Member for Arthur knows full well - and he's quite correct , it involves three areas in rural Manitoba - that this is not something that developed as a result of an Estimates review, as a result of some initiative on the part of the Attorney-General. These are recommendations that come down from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police themselves; and 2373

Monday, 25 May, 1987 it's a realiza tion, I would suggest, at both the federal level and the provincial level, that there has to be, in some cases, a rationalization of services. If the RCM P can assure that the quality of service will not decrease and that there are savings to be made, then I think it would irresponsible for the Province of Manitoba not to take that advice. I want to assure the member that I did sit in with meetings with represe ntation from the RCMP and the Attorney-General, and those were the very facts that were provided to us. MR.

CHAIRMAN: It being ten o'clock, what is the will of the committee? Do you want to rise at ten o'clock? I'll permit the member another question then, and we'll rise. The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I think it's up to the committee to give you direction. MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, that's what I'm asking. MR. J. DOWNEY: Okay, I'll just make a comment, and then we're prepared to rise if that's okay, unless the Mi nis ter wants to . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: You said that you wer en't looking in that di rection, but your deputy critic motioned that you wanted to quit at nine o'clock, so I was respond ing to him.

MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I'm used to a little tougher life and a little longer hours to make a living than some of my colleagues. My comeback to the Min ister on this is, he can't blame the RCM P or the Federal Government on this decision. It was he and his Cabi net colleagues who decided to reduce the RCMP service in his own riding of Winn ipeg Beach, of Reston and Deloraine. Don't sit here and try and blame the RCMP. The RCMP take dir ection from the Attorney-General 's Office and from the Cabinet. A MEMBER: No, they don't. MR. J. DOWNEY: Ye s, they do.

Their responsibility is to keep police officers where the government wants them, and that's exactly how it is. I've been at several meetings, and I know exactly how it is. A MEMBER: Obvious ly, you don't. MR. J. DOWNEY: Ye s I do. It came from Assistant Comm issioner Henr y, as to where the officers are . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Add ress your remarks to the Chair , please. MR. J. DOWNEY: The provincial Cabin et decides. In fact, Mr. Chairman, the Min ister I think is very irresponsible in not having taken hold of this as a Muni cipal Affairs Minis ter.

All this was going on and he was saying, well, it's in the best inter ests of saving money. It wasn't in the best interests of saving money; it hasn't been substantiated to this day that there's a nickel saved in the moves that were taken and the disruptions that took place in Southwest Manitoba and in his own riding, Mr. Chairman. It is an ina ccurate assumption that there's money being saved because of the moves that were made. It hasn't been proven and it can't be proven, Mr. Chairman. I want the Mi nister to clearly understand that.

So don't let him sit here and say that it's somebody else's responsibility - it's he and his Cabinet colleagues for the loss of RCM P. Now the question is: How is he going to sort out who and where the responsibility of the RCMP now falls? Does this RCMP officer now answer to the municipalities of Brandon and Win chester? Is that who they answer to? They're paying the price. Is it one officer who covers that territory? Do they interchange? How does it go? I know that it's a pooling of money in tha t type of system. Mr. Chairman, why was the move made?

If he'd have been carrying out his responsibili ties as a responsible Min ister, it wouldn't have happened and got to this stage. I'll tell you, the cost of the bureaucracy and the cost of the negotiations and all the agreements and every thing that's going to have be gone through will far surpass any financial savings that the move would have made, which they initially thought it would. We can't get answers here tonight from this Mi nis ter as to whether or not the half-mill will be lif ted off the taxpayers in my constituenc y.

If it isn't lifted off them, then it's a form of double taxation for police prote ction, and that is not fair. It's discrimina tion against those taxpayers. Does this Mini ster want to sit here and say well, that's quite okay, I can live with that agreement? Does he expect them to pay double taxation, pay into the half mill to the provincial coffers for police protection and then have to go out and pay through their local tax base? My goodness, it's taxes we want to take off some of these farmers, Mr. Chairman. His government has moved, or pretended they've moved, to take some education taxes off farm land.

What good is it to take education taxes off of farm land, and then turn around and slap them with an RCMP tax? Giv e them a little bit of room to breathe, Mr. Chairman. That's what we're after, not imposition of more taxes. It's imp osition of less taxes and fair and equitable assessment of taxes on those individuals. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Mr. Chairman, I don't know if $12 million is pretending; it's far from pretending.

On the matter as to the half mill, I certainly think tha t it would be fair not to requir e those municipa lities to have to assume that cost in view of their assuming probably a larger cost for the financing of tha t one officer. With respect to the deal, the agreement, I believe that the Member for Arthur probably found out about the same time as I did about the agreement having been entered into, and that was in early February or late January of this year, which was done at the in itiative of the municipal bodies. So I don't know why . MR. J. DOWNEY: Blackmailed into it. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Oh no, no.

Those are pretty strong words. 2374

Monday, 25 May, 1987 MR. J. DOWNEY: Blackmailed into it, it sure was. They were blackmailed into it. You lose your RCMP and see what your constituents say. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for La Verendrye. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question to the Min ister is: What is the cost per officer to the Province of Manitoba, a police officer, RCM P officer? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: For those officers for which the province is financially responsible, I understand it is $49,200 per officer. MR. H. PANK RATZ: That's the amount tha t the Province of Manitoba has to pay per officer. Am I correct? HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: That's the best information we have, but the Attorney-General would be in a position to respond to that better. MR. H. PANKRATZ: I realize we want to close for the even ing, but my final question is: Has the Province of Manitoba got less RCM P officers in the Province of Manitoba now than it had a year ago? HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I don't have a specific answer; the Attorney-General would have that.

I have a feeling that, in fact, the number has increased slightly because of reallocation and because of some admin istrative changes that have taken place with subdivision - whatever the title is - but there have been some. I certainly know that, for whatever reason, in my constituen cy, Teulon has an extra officer. I belie ve that Gimli has and Winn ipeg Beach lost in the process. MR. CHAIRMAN: Comm ittee rise. SUPPLY - CROWN INVESTMENTS MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Comm ittee of Supply , please come to order. We have been considering Budge t Item No. 1. (b)

(1) Crown Inv estments Admini stration, Crown Corporation Support: Salaries; 1. (b)

(2) Other Expenditures. The Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr. Chairman, before we broke for lunch or supper, I asked the question on the Planning and Priorities and what the role of the Planning and Priorities Comm ittee was in relationship to the Crown In vestments or Crown Reform Comm ittee !!nd also to the various departments. Can the Minis ter elaborate on that particular aspect, please? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honour able Min ister. HON. G. DOER: Ye s, Mr.

Chairman, the Planning and Priorities Commit tee is chaired by the Premier, and the Cabi net is chair ed of course by the Premier, the Crown Reform Commit tee answers to Cab inet, and the Planning and Priorities Commit tee would answer to Cabinet as well. MR. L. DERKACH: Can the Minis ter ind icate to us who the principal players are on the Planning and Priorities Commit tee? HON. G. DOER: Mr. Chairman, the Planning and Priorities Comm ittee is not part of Crown Investments. I do not chair it and the members of the Planning and Priorities Comm ittee is a matter for the Premier. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr.

Chairman, the reason I asked the question is, of course, in the past when Cabi net Min isters took submissions, they took them to the ERIC committee, which has since been di ssolved and, as I under stand it, has been replaced by Planning and Priorities Committee, or at least part of the responsibility is the responsibility of the Planning and Priorities Comm ittee.

That's why I was asking the question as to who the principal players are and I think it is relevant to this particular di scussion, especially to the effect that we now have a new committee, a Comm ittee on Crown Reform, which there must be a connection between - the Planning and Priorities and the Crown Investments Comm ittee. HON. G. DOER: Mr. Chairman, I did give the names of the Cabinet Comm ittee on Crown Reform and the Planning and Priorities Commit tee is not under the auspices of the Crown Inv estments Department, it's under the chairpersonship of the Premi er.

As such, it is a Comm ittee of Cabinet and this committee is a committee of Cabinet. We report to Cabinet, the Premier chairs Cabinet, and we are accountable to Cabi net. MR. L. DERKACH: In other words, Mr. Chairman, the Minis ter will not answer that question and we will not know from him who the principal players are on the Planning and Priorities Comm ittee. Another question that I had asked prior to the supper break, or dinn er break, was the question on internal audits and who those internal audits go to from the various departments.

At the present time, I am sure there are internal audits conducted in each of the corporations. Do those internal audits now go to the Mini ster responsible and then to the Crown Reform group, or do they go to Cabinet and the Planning and Priorities Commit tee? HON. G. DOER: Mr. Chairman, the internal audits now go to the CEO and the President of the Board of Directors. One of the areas which we're reviewing very extensively is the whole area of internal audi t commit tees. We've had a great deal of conversa tions with private sector auditing or accounting companies, chartered accountants.

We have had discussions with people in our auditing area of government; we've discussed it with the federal department, federal auditor general. In fact, I met with Mr. Dye at one occasion about the issues of both internal and external audit. The other area that we are attempting to standardize is the whole area of the comprehensive audits as well. Again, it's one of the items that I mentioned. I said there were a number of items on the table that the Crown Reform Commit tee is dealing with. The whole 2375

Monday, 25 May, 1987 area of organizational audits, both internal and the organizational audits on a comprehensi ve basis, is an area that we want to standardize and we will be proposing standard timing for those kinds of decisions. We've had extensive discussion, as I say, with a great numb er of experts in the area. There's not a great deal of unanimity by the way, Mr. Chairman.

There is a huge deba te on the whole, for example, value for money proposal, whether that in fact is doub le-guessing the policy makers, the decision makers versus a more comprehensive type of audit system which will allow for review to see whether the objectives that have been established pursuant to the mandate are being met. So we've had discussions in terms of the internal audit function.

There are a num ber of proposals that we are looking at in terms of standardizing and formalizing the external audit function, notwit hstanding the normal audit function that is conduc ted either by the Provincial Auditor for some of the small Crowns, or an outside audit company for some of the other major Crown corporations.

So there are three audits we're looking at: the in ternal audit process, which is the ongoing audit process; the year-over-year audit; and the third audit is the whole area of organization audits and the various options within those organizational audits, one of being the strict value for money kind of system and the second one being the review of a corporation to see whether in fact the objectives and mandate established by the government is in fact being on a periodic basis being accomplished by the specific Crown in question. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr.

Chairman, I would presume that internal audits would have been conducted on the various Crowns in the past. I would think that's only one of the key components of a proper management of a Crown corporation or any compa ny. Having said that, I'm wondering, can the Mini ster elaborate on where the in ternal audits went to before and who was responsible for at least taking a look and ascer taining whether the internal audit was done properly and what it revealed? HON. G. DOER: I'm sorry, I didn't catch the whole part of your question.

I was just discussing my assumptions on internal audits based on my ten-week or eleven week experience with them in the Crown area. It's my experience, one of the problems with the internal audit function has been the issue of some internal audits are very, very internal - very internal. And that's one of the weaknesses where we have in the corporate sector, in many of the major private corporations, and inde ed in some major Crown corporations, there is the ability of a board of directors and the individual financial officers of the corporation to form an internal audit committee as members opposite well know.

That way you have a cross

section of board of di rectors, mem bers and the internal auditing function. Where you have a situation where the internal audit function is a staff function within a Crown corporation, and where you have that staff function reporting to the president or the CEO of the corpora tion, then I think you've got an internal audit process. That's when you potentially could get into some trouble, in terms of what's being identified and not being raised to the board of dir ectors and which isn't. No one likes to bring bad news to a board of dir ectors un less they absolutely have to.

I believe in a model, qui te frank ly, that has representatives of the board of directors on the internal audit commit tee as well as the appropria te staff mem bers. In fact, I do believe that the majority of them should be from the board of di rectors as an internal audit committee, as opposed to the internal auditing staff function. MR. L. DERKACH: I would assume, Mr. Min ister, that at the present time there are internal audit committees set up. I'm wondering, are we going to see a change now in those particular audit committees.

Are you going to disband the audit committees that are presently in place in the various corporations that are under the purvie w of the department? Or are we going to see the role of that internal audit commit tee expanded? HON. G. DOER: I would say , first of all, we'r e rationalizing which Crowns will be in and out of the whole ambit that we're looking at. Secondly , we're looking at the role of internal audits. I would see for some internal auditing functions in Crowns, in terms of an audit committee, there would be a change.

Where there hasn't been, previous to this board of directors, members on an internal audit committee, I would say that that group would be working with the internal auditing function of the Crown, which is, as I say, fairly standard in major corporations. MR. L. DERKACH: Still on the audit aspect, would the Min ister, as the chief Min ister responsible for Crown Reform, then be prepared to table int ernal audits for the House? HON. G. DOER: Mr. Chairman, that's why they call them internal audits. Many of them have functions that deal with the commercial aspects of those particular Crowns.

We table the annual statements of any Crown corporation within the public arena. We answer a great num ber of specific questions on the Crown corporations at the committees of the Legislature. The Aud itor also has access to those Crown corporations, either the audit that's done by the external company or the audit that the Auditor thems elves will conduct. Not all auditor's reports are external, but the sign ificant ones are. I have faith in that type of system.

What I would like to imp rove is the role of the staff function and the board function, the standardization of those two issues in the Crown corporations, because I think there are some differences between some of the Crowns in that area. That's the area we're looking at, how best to do internal audits with the role of the board of directors and the internal function within the Crown. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr.

Chairman, I guess I'm still somewhat confused as to the role of the Crown Investments Department, and also then in relation to that the role of this new Comm ittee of Crown Reform, which will have a staff complement as well. In the responses that we've heard here this afternoon and even ing, we have I think ascertained tha t the role 2376

Monday, 25 May, 1987 of this new commit tee of Cabi net is not going to be sign ificantly di fferent than the intended role of the Crown Investments Department. Now, if we have now another layer of bureaucracy and another group of Min isters responsible for the Crowns, one of these departments is going to be dup licating what the other is doing.

I wonder if the Mi nister would like to guess, or if he knows, tell the Hous e whether perhaps we are going to see a termination of the Crown Inv estments Department as we know it, and will that department be replaced by the Crown committee or a department on Crown Reform. HON. G. DOER: We will be proposing changes that would potentially change the role of the existing department and how it operates, yes. MR. L. DERKACH: The Minis ter is still not telling us, are we going to see the dismantling of the Crown Inv estments Department and being replaced by the Commit tee on Crown Reform with a staff complement? HON.

G. DOER: Mr. Chairman, the member opposite aske d whether we would see some changes from the Crown In vestments, or di smantling the Crown Investments Department as we know it - I wouldn't use the word "dismantling" - I would say we are potentially proposing significant changes. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr. Chairman, again we see an un certai nty.

A Min ister who can't answer the question even though he's been in charge of this department for some five -and-a-half months and isn't able to tell us precisely what di rection the government is moving in and precisely what dir ection his committee, as a matter of fact, is moving in, in dealing with this whole area of Crown Investments and Crown corporations and some control over them, therefore, you know, it poses some serious qu est ions in the minds of Opposition and Manitobans as well as to whether or not there is a real hold on, or grasp of the problems that we are having with our Crown corporations and whether the government is really intending to pursue, trying to get a better handle on it as was expressed in the First Mini ster's release.

I notice in the release that the First Min ister also ma kes mention of add

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-2-54b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 2nd hansardpdf 54b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	49fb9e52261ddb6608a3e5ae65d971ba0be6019b

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