Manitoba Hansard — 23 March 1982 (Sitting 19A, 32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-19a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. D. James Walding (St. Vit al): Presenting Petitions . . Reading and Receiving Petitions PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Flin Flon. MR. JERR Y T. ST ORIE (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolu tions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Rupertsland, that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried.

MINISTERIA L STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. LAURENT DES JAR DINS (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, judging from some of the news reports, members of the House are undoubtedly wondering how the residents and hospitals of Western Manitoba are coping with the job actions implemented by the physicians in that part of the province earlier this week. As it appears that these job actions are putting pressure on the outpatient departments of certain hospitals.

I've asked the Manitoba Health Services Commission to monitor the situation closely to determine precisely what problems are being encountered. I've also asked the Commission to record any addi tional costs incurred, either by hospitals for addi tional staffing, or by doctors from changes in billing practices. While it is normal practice for unions to strike and the membership to absorb the cost of the strike, it would appear in this situation that the MMA are encouraging certain of their members to finance the job action by additional charges against the Pro vincial Treasury. This is unacceptable, Mr.

Speaker, to this government and I have therefore instructed the Manitoba Health Services Commission to provide me with a list of alternatives as to how these additional costs may be recovered from those responsible for incurring the costs. With regard to the matter of standards of care, I've already written to the College of Physicians and Sur geons asking them to advise me how they are moni toring the situation at the present time to ensure that standards are maintained and to ensure that medical services required by the residents of Manitoba are continuing to be provided.

I also intend to ask the College of Physicians and Surgeons as to whether or not the job action recom- mended by the Manitoba Medical Association that would see nonemergent cases being referred to the emergency department of a hospital, is in fact good medicine by their definition. I am also asking the College of Physicians and Surgeons if such irresponsible action by some of their members could not have the effect of impending required services for true emergency cases, if and when these emergency departments have been inun dated with non-emergent cases. Mr.

Speaker, I will keep the House fully informed with regard to the foregoing as I receive reports from the Manitoba Health Services Commission and the College of Physicians and Surgeons. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. l.R.(Bu

d) SHERM AN (Fort Garry): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the Opposition I wish to thank the Honourable Minister of Health for that statement, Sir. 737 I must say that we would have two criticisms at this juncture. One, the action being taken by the Minister and the Manitoba Health Services Commission seems somewhat late.

There are a number of patients in Westman, particularly in the Brandon area, who have already been seriously inconvenienced and the Bran don General Hospital itself has had severe additional pressures placed on it in the last 24 to 36 hours because contingency planning and pre-planning obviously was not conducted by the government or the Commission or by the Commission at the government's request. When we discussed this issue last week, the Minis ter of Health advised the House that it was up to the College of Physicians and Surgeons to monitor this sort of thing.

He indicated quite clearly that he had no contingency plans in place. Today, he concedes rightly that contingency plans are necessary and so 36 hours after the work-to-rule campaign began, we are seeing the emergence for the first time of some contingency planning, Mr. Speaker. We cannot other than criticize the Minister and the government for that slow response to an action which they foresaw, which all Manitoba knew was coming, some seven to ten days ago, if not longer than that. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I have to ask the Minister and I will do so during question period, whether fee

schedule negotiations are under way between the Commission and the MMA and if not, why not? There is no reason, Sir, notwithstanding the difficulty, not withstanding the binding arbitration dispute, and notwithstanding the inconveniences caused all around by this work-to-rule campaign, there is no reason why the two sides at the urging and initiation of the government cannot be attempting to get together to deal with fee schedules for 1982-83.

If the government has not invoked that kind of action, if the government has not taken steps to get those negotiations under way, then it is at fault, Sir, for the first time in this situation, at fault for not trying to resolve this situation and create a climate where the binding arbitration

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 issue could be settled peacefully. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. AL MACKLING (St.Jam es): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table a copy of the Annual Report of the department. I'm advised that in its finished printed form, it's not available yet, but in accordance with the rule·s, I want to file a copy of the report. I think the Clerk has a couple of other copies if members do want to see them. MR. CHAI RMAN: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. ROLAND PENNER (Fort Rouge): Mr.

Chair man, I beg leave to table the 1981 Annual Report of the Manitoba Human Rights Commission. MR. SPE AKER: Notices of Motion of Bills . Introduction INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. SPEAK ER: Before we reach Oral Questions might I direct the attention of honourable members to the galleries where we have 26 students of Grade 5 standing of the Governor Semple School. These stu dents are under the direction of Mrs. Arvenitites. This school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for St. Johns. There are also 30 students of Grade 9 standing from the Ken Seaford Junior High School.

These students are under the direction of Mrs. Roberta Carrns and this school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Kildonan. We also have 42 visitors of the 84th Air Cadets, Thunder Bay, Ontario, who are under the direction of Captain Horton. On behalf of all the honourable members I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Stur geon Creek. MR. J. FRANK JOHNS TON (Stur geon Creek): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Economic Development and Tourism, and it pertains to the small business relief program.

Can the Minister inform the House if the final guidelines for eligibility of that pro gram have been issued to date? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Eco nomic Development. HON. MURIEL SMITH (Osb orne): The guidelines have been made available. MR. JO HN STON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, in the press release of the eligibility it said it must be demonstrated that owners or shareholders cannot contribute further equity. Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the Minister inform the House what is meant by further equity.

Does this mean that people's 738 houses, cars, personal properties, will have to be made available as equity to be eligible for this program? MRS. SMI TH: Mr. Speaker, the intent of that is the further financial contribution in the area that one would normally draw on finances for a business oper ation. It doesn't mean one's personal belongings. MR. JOH NSTON: Mr.

Speaker, I would ask the ques tion, the Federal Government program that they have for small business outlines very clearly the eligibility regarding that particular statement, and I ask the Min ister if there is going to be a statement made regard ing the equity that people will have to put forward regarding this program. MRS. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, any clarification that's required with regard to those details will be made available . MR. JOH NSTO N: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minis ter, there are three private sector boards supporting the three enterprised Manitoba Small Business Assis tance Centres.

These boards are made up from peo ple from private industry to advise the government. There are six private sector boards to advise on six specific industries within the province. Can the Minis ter inform the House what is meant by further equity? Does this mean that peoples' houses, cars, personal properties will have to be made available as equity to be eligible for this program? MRS. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, the intent of that is the further financial contribution in the area that one would normally draw on finances for a business oper ation. It doesn't mean one's personal belongings. MR. JO HNSTON: Mr.

Speaker, I would ask the ques tion, the Federal Government program that they have for small business outlines very clearly the eligibility regarding that particular statement, I would ask the Minister if there is going to be a statement made regarding the equity that people will have to put for ward regarding this program? MR S. SMI TH: Mr. Speaker, any clarification that's required with regard to those details will be made available. MR. JOH NSTON: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minis ter, there are three private sector boards supporting the three Enterprise Manitoba Small Business Assis tance Centres.

These boards are made up of people from private industry to advise the government. There are six private sector boards to advise on six specific industries within the province. Can the Minister inform the House if these private sector boards had discus sions with the government or was the program dis cussed with the government before it was brought forward and the eligibility guidelines brought down? MRS. SMI TH: Mr. Speaker, the consultation was widespread in an informal sense. It's a program that the party promoted during the election and they con sulted anyone they thought would have relevant

23 March, 1982 information. Those boards were not specifically con sulted because they didn't come under the particular program; they did not have responsibility for that par ticular program. MR. JOH NS TON: Mr. Speaker, this program is for -(Interjection)- Small Business Relief Program is what it's called. Could I ask the Minister if any of the industries such as the small business

section of the banks, or the small business

section of the co operatives, or the small business

section of the Mani toba Chamber of Commerce, was there specific dis cussion with these organizations regarding the eligibility guidelines and the program in general? MRS. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, there were discussions specifically with the banks and informally with the other groups that have been named. One of the diffi culties in developing this program is that there is no institution in this society that has the required data so that we had to make the best guesstimate we could on the basis of available data.

We found the banks very co-operative in sharing with us the kind of informa tion they have and we have designed the program as carefully as we possibly could so that our projections should come in as predicted. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. A. BRIAN RANSOM (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Some confusion seems to have arisen concerning the extent of the federal cutbacks to the province and the impact that will have upon provincial revenues. It has ranged, Mr.

Speaker, from initial estimates, I believe, in excess of $150 million to an indication yesterday by the Minister that it was going to be in the range of $63 million. This morning there is a press report to lead one to believe that the actual impact on provincial revenues will be approximately $38 million. I wonder if the Minister of Finance would care to clear up the misunderstanding that may exist with regard to those figures? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I will do my best to.

There were a large number of different figures coming out over the last number of months because of three different proposed equalization formulas. First of all, the existing formula which exists until March 31 st; secondly, the Ontario formula which was initially put forth by the Federal Government on November 12th, 1981; and thirdly, the five-province average which came out later. In addition to that, there were a number of other factors which complicated the issue.

One was the census figures of 1981 which became available within the last month-and-a-half or so and which resulted in some negative adjustments for Manitoba because of our population loss relative to the total population of Canada. Finally, there were some differences, some changes, as a result of specific measures negotiated by the provinces with respect to entering into the new equal ization proposal. There was a transitional assistance arrangment for Manitoba in its initial three years.

There was one other factor and that was the matter of an offsetting increase in tax revenue to the province as a result of the November 12th Budget. We started off with an estimated loss of $160 million in November. At that time, there was a projected offset of a $31-million tax increase which would have, you could say, provided us with a total loss of $130 million. That $160 million now, dropped down with the changes since November 12th to approximately $60 million and the tax increase to offset it had dropped from $31 million to $24 million because of the changes in December to the November Budget.

That's where the approximate $38-million figure comes from for the year 1982-83, but I would hasten to add that although that doesn't sound as significant as the numbers that were being thrown around at first, the total numbers net after having deducted our increase in taxation benefits over the five years still amounts to $719 mil lion. Maybe that will help the honourable member. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Minis ter how much money he expects to get by way of federal transfers in 1982-83 as compared to 1981-82? MR.

SCHROEDER: I don't have the 1981-82 figures in front of me, but I believe that in equalization we were expecting approximately $390 million for 1981-82 and we are now expecting $431 million for equalization. I don't have the 1981-82 EPF figure. We are now expect ing $464 million from the Federal Government in EPF payments for 1982-83. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, it would appear from those figures that actually the province will be receiv ing more money in 1982-83 than they did in 1981-82, which of course does not constitute a cutback.

I wonder if the Minister would undertake to check those figures in detail and provide them to the House. 739 Also, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister could advise the House under the new fiscal arrangements that are to be brought in, what percentage of post secondary education costs will the Federal Govern ment bear? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, I don't have the exact percentage. I certainly would like to get back to the honourable member on that question, but he sug gested that there was no cutback because there will be more funding in 1982-83 than in 1981-82.

There is a cutback from what we would have received under the old plan. I must say I'm glad that the honourable member is not doing the negotiating for Manitoba, because if he was taking the position that this was a good deal then, indeed, we would have ended up quitting with our bargaining a long time ago. There is a serious decrease from where we would have been under the old system, and in the view of this government when we get less under a new so-called improved plan than we would have gotten under an old unimproved plan, then we prefer the unimproved plan to the new improved plan. We are concerned.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, this government is so concerned about a possible misunderstanding by the Conserva-

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 tive Party of the effects of the new arrangements that just afternoon I was in touch with Jake Epp, the Member for Provencher, to discuss some of the prob lems we are having, because I understand that some of the federal Conservative members have been taken in by some of the Liberal numbers, Flora MacDonald for instance. I believe that when all the figures are out the members on the other side will again agree that Mr. MacEachen's numbers, although they sound very nice, the bottom line is that Manitoba loses 719 million from where we would have been under the old system. MR. RANSOM : Mr.

Speaker, I object to the Minister trying to say that I favour the position that the Federal Government has taken. What I have attempted to do, Mr. Speaker, is to find out which figures are accurate, because one can go back in the record and see that first of all there was talk of $161 million cutback; then $120 million cutback. Then the Minister couldn't tell us what the cutback was; then the First Minister went to Brandon and said it was at least 100 million; two days later the Minister makes a statement in the House that it's 63 million; this morning in the paper it says that it's 38 million, Mr. Speaker.

All we're asking for is a clarification of the figures. I believe in his answer the Minister undertook to take that. Perhaps he would confirm that he is indeed going to get the answers - specific answers - to those questions. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, I will do my best to provide full detailed answers possibly with tables so that they can be more clearly understood. I recognize that there is some difficulty in following all these numbers and in my first answer I very specifically tried to explain why there are all these complications.

There is a good reason why we came from 160 million down to the 38 million and it has to do with those various items that I first referred to. Again, I will provide the Member for Turtle Moun tain with as many numbers as I can and in fact, I will try to get that done before the end of this afternoon. I would encourage the members on the other side, rather than to sit there and suggest that because we're getting a few more 1982-83 dollars than 1981-82 dol lars saying there's no cutback, to support the Mani toba position so that we will not lose as much money as we currently would be losing under the new system.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. DONA LD ORC HARD (Pembina): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister responsi ble for the Manitoba Telephone System. Did the government instruct the Manitoba Telephone System to place an additional satellite dish in Thompson? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com munity Services. HON. LEON ARD S. EVANS (B randon East): Mr. Speaker, the MTS has responded to the needs of the operator in Thompson and I indicated to that member the other day, I think we're getting repetitive ques tions here.

The fact is that the MTS, by this action, I 740 believe, has met the needs, and is meeting the needs of the people in that good community of Thompson. MR. OR CHARD: Mr. Speaker, once again, I ask a very direct and very simple question. Did the government instruct MTS to place the satellite dish in Thompson? I don't want the rhetoric that we've been getting. I would just prefer a clear answer. Did the government instruct? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. DES JAR DINS: Mr.

Speaker, on March 15th the Honourable Member for Steinbach asked the ques tion, he wanted to know about the trust fund that I'd previously allowed for $2 million for the program of capital facilities. I'm informed that because the pre vious administration had offered the capital facilities programs at the rate of $2 million for two years that we are now in a position that we must remain within the limits of their revenue allocated one-year period. The trust fund is completely depleted and we will review this during the presentation of the department Estimates. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (La Verendrye): I wonder if the Minister could inform the House whether or not the formula that was adopted, I believe by the government when he was a member back seven, eight years ago and the previous administration, whether that formula which divides the lottery revenues between Cultural Affairs and the Recreation and Sports Departments, has the government changed that particular formula? MR. DES JARDINS: No, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Tuxedo. MR. GARY FILMON (Tuxedo): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister responsible for Housing in this province. In view of the govern ment's announcements I believe some five weeks ago of their Mortgage Interest Rate Relief Program, I wonder if the Minister could tell the House how many Manitobans thus far, who are faced with the adverse effects of mortgage renewals, have qualified for the government Mortgage Interest Relief Program? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Housing. MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, I'll take that as notice, I don't have the statistics with me, but while I have the floor, might I indicate that the forms that the honour able member was asking about are being mailed out this week and now are available. I would also like to answer a question in respect to another matter, Mr. Speaker. An honourable member asked in respect to the Parks Branch's activities in respect to the Falcon Motor Hotel and I'm in a position to -(lnterjection)-yes, they asked about the El'nor Hotel and that hotel is not involved in the proceedings that the Parks Branch were compelled to initiate in

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 respect to what is apparently really a derelict building, left derelict largely because of the fire that occurred. It's most unfortunate, but the owners of that property have not been enabled to restore it and it is a problem being there on the right-of-way on the highway, I should say. The department is concerned to have that property cleared, if it's not being developed and that is what has taken place, Mr. Speaker. MR. FILMON: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, I wonder, fol lowing up, firstly I'm pleased that only five weeks after the government has started to publicize the Mortgage Interest Relief Program, we finally got forms out. That's a good sign, I suppose. I wonder if the Minister could tell us just what is the amount allocated in the Budget for this year for the advertising program which is currently under way on radio, I believe televi sion, and certainly in the newspaper for the Critical Home Repair Program. MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, I don't have the details of the advertising budget at hand but I can assure the honourable member that the expenses will be far less than the propaganda that he put out when he was in office. MR. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that I can't recall any particular advertising campaign that was conducted by MHRC during my term as Minister, he's going to have to go quite some way to achieve that. I wonder if the Minister could indicate to us what advertising agency is being used to prepare the adver tising program. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, again I'll have to take that as notice, but I'm sure it's a much more effective advertising agency than the honourable members used. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Education. HON . MAUREEN HEMPHILL (Logan): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I rise in reply to the question raised by the Honourable Member for La Verendrye. I'm sorry that he's not here to hear the answer to the question. I'm sure he's going to be very pleased with the information. I have specific information regarding the property tax situation in Hanover School Division to present to him, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, as he is aware, and as I have announced in this House previously, the Han over School Division, like all other school divisions in the Province of Manitoba, faces a 4.2 mill rise in the Education Support Levy, Mr. Speaker. I want to make it clear that they face that 4.2 mill increase in the Education Support Levy as a direct result of the Con servatives' Education Support Program, Mr. Speaker.

This was a program that was legislated by the Con servative Government. where we met all of the com ponents of the program; we raised the $469 million required and we put in an additional 54.4 percent of direct provincial dollars. We put in more provincial 741 money than the previous government put in before. In spite of that, Mr. Speaker, there was a 4.2 mill rate increase as a result of the Education Support Pro gram.

Fortunately, for the taxpayers of Hanover this government brought in a supplemental program that gave assistance to Hanover and every other school division in the Province of Manitoba to reduce the tax mill increases resulting from their program and I would like to tell you specifically what help Hanover gets. They receive $474,275 in supplemental grants; that translates, Mr. Speaker, into a 10.8 mill of property tax relief. Their program, Mr. Speaker, caused an increase of 4.2 mills and our program caused a mill rate relief of 10.8 mills. I have one more question to respond to, Mr. Speaker.

It was a previous question put by the Hon ourable Member for Tuxedo and he asked me if I was bringing in the supplemental program to help my friends and the answer, Mr. Speaker, is yes, because as the honourable member knows, I have friends on every school board in the Province of Manitoba. I would like to tell him what help some of these friends are getting. The Seine River School Divison receives $338,242 in supplemental grants and experiences a mill rate reduction of 8.3 mills; Mountain School Division, a 7.2 mill relief; White Horse Plains 6.9 mill relief; Pine Creek 6. 7 and Inter-Mountain 5.8.

I could go on, Mr. Speaker, but we know that none of these areas are represented by government members. I have one last piece of information to communicate from one of my friends. "Mrs. Hemphill, re the Educa tional Support Program and its effect on Pine Creek School Division No. 30. The Pine Creek School Divi sion Board would like to thank you for the additional funding your government has provided to the Educa tional Support Program. Without the additional fund ing, our mill rate increase for 1982 would have been 22 mills.

The additional support has decreased the mill rate by 10 mills which is a tremendous help to our local taxpayers." I suggest to the honourable members opposite that before they take any more licks they check with their school divisions to find out what would have hap pened had we left the program the way they brought it in and what did happen with the changes that we brought in. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. BANMAN: I wonder if the Minister could inform the House whether or not the business tax in the town of Steinbach for school purposes will be going up 17.1 mills.

MR S. HEMP HILL: The Hanover School Division has not finalized its budget, Mr. Speaker, so I do not have that specific information, but I can tell you that it is quite possible. It is quite possible that figure is true and the reason is that the Hanover School Division is one of the disadvantaged divisions with low assess ment and low per pupil expenditures caught in the disparity and the disadvantages created through the Educational Support Program that they brought into

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 place. If they want to increase the quality of educa tional programs based on the money that they were given through establishing 1980 as a base year, the fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that is going to be hard on the taxpayers of his division because they didn't get a fair deal in the initial program. MR. BANMAN: Mr.

Speaker, on the same question I raised yesterday, I wonder if the Minister would con firm then and she can go back and do the numbers, but confirm that the information which I have that there will be a 17.1 mill increase for school purposes and that translates then to a 21.8 percent increase for school purposes? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. CLAYTON MANN ESS (Morris): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In view of the Minister of Education's remarks and comments to the effect that a reduction in the tax mill increase- I hear the Minister talk about mills and percentage terms and we all wonder really what it means, I'd like to ask the First Minister the question, in discussion with local councillors of the RM of Mac Donald this morning I learned that the total 1982 property levies for education purposes are to increase by 24 percent or, in dollar terms, $482 on a

section of land. How is this fact rationalized in light of the com ment in the Throne Speech which made reference to an easing of the effects of property taxation? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the First Minister. HON. HO WARD R. PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, I think that the Minister of Education has done a good job of dealing with the question of the support that is being provided in respect to education at the property level in the Province of Manitoba, that this govern ment indeed is providing assistance as per the legisla tion that was processed last year in this Chamber.

As a result of providing assistance as per the previous government's legislation, we indeed have resulted in a 4.2 mill increase. What has happened is that we have retained the extent of provincial funding at 65 percent. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt, and I don't think there should indeed be any doubt in anyone's mind that this government in maintaining support at 65 percent as was the formula of provincial support last year, that we have continued the process. Had the previous government had continued in office, Mr.

Speaker, then I think the Honourable Member for Morris would indeed have been getting up with com ments about very, very sharp increases away beyond what he has mentioned this afternoon that, indeed, under the previous government, there would have been slippage, ii we follow the kind of pattern that was established in 1978, 79 and into 80 as a result of the previous government's attention to financing of edu cation at the local level. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. MANN ESS: Mr.

Speaker, in spite of the First Min ister's and the Minister's of Education reference to reduction in tax, we are still talking about $500 a

section of land increase. Does the Minister realize that 742 with the price of wheat being frozen and the price of barley dropping some 30 cents a bushel and that all farm costs are expected to increase some 15 percent, and if he realizes this, how does he expect grain farmers and businesses, in general, to meet the new taxation burden? MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, as I said yesterday when the question of the price of wheat and barley was raised in this Chamber that honourable members across the way could indeed perform in a very practi cal and a very concrete way by joining with us in connection with the proposals in respect to the changes in the Crow rate affecting transportation costs for western farmers, I would like to hear from the Honourable Member for Morris as to his position in respect to the Crow. MR. MAN NESS: Mr.

Speaker, our side, too, wel comes the debate on the Crow and we'll leave it for this minute but has the Minister in all matters related to pushing back the increased tax burden upon busi ness in a manner with no reference to revenues or profit. At least the Crow issue makes reference to revenues and profit. But, this issue, forcing back taxa tion as a fixed cost, how long does he expect, the First Minister expect, our small businesses and farms, the very backbone of our economy to maintain viability? MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, it is for the precise rea son that indeed the system that was enacted last year is, in our view, inequitable that we have launched a review of that particular legislation in order to ensure that there is greater equity introduced into the educa tion support program than that which is the case presently.

It is for that reason that the Minister of Education provided an additional $14-some million this year, in order to remove to the extent that it was possible some of the inequities that existed within the previous legislation as passed last year by the previous Con servative administration in the Province of Manitoba, Mr. Speaker.

I would also like to point out to the honourable member, because it's very interesting it's not the Honourable Member for Gladstone that is asking the question, the Minister of Education made reference to this and I indeed would table this letter, the letter from Pine Creek School Division that demonstrates very clearly how this government, in a very short period of time, moved to remove some of the inequities involv ing some of the school divisions such as Pine Creek School Division No. 30 in a very short space of time alter assuming office. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Tuxedo. MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education. Can the Minister of Education confirm that the Education Support Program that was introduced by the previous government, did not bind her govern ment or her as a Minister to putting any portion what soever of the increased expenditures in this year's budget on the property tax roles in the form of the foundation levy? Can she confirm that was a decision

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 solely of her and her Cabinet and the government she represents to put 4.2 mills on the foundation levy and there was nothing within the Education Support Pro gram that bound her to that decision? It was her deci sion and hers alone. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Education. MRS. HEMPHIL L: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can answer that question. I will respond to what the honourable member said because I know what his question was if he had framed it in the way of a question. We had to meet the program requirements and we had to meet the dollar figure $469 million.

We main tained every aspect of that program, the 65/30 tradi tional split, we maintained. We put more direct pro vincial dollars in than had been put in before and we did have some choices, Mr. Speaker, we did have some choices. Do you know what we could have done, Mr. Speaker? We could have raised that entire amount as the Conservative government previously did through the Education Support Levy last year when they raised a $104 million for that program through the Education Support Levy and raised the mill rate increase to 30 mills. Now, Mr.

Speaker, we could have done that, that was a choice that we had and we chose not to do that because if we had not put an additional $26 million of direct provincial money into that Education Support Program, all of the school divisions would have faced a 12 mill increase, not 4.2, a 12. So, we did have a choice and we chose to put more provincial money in than you put in before and to reduce the level of the mill rate impact on the local property taxes. MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister confirm that concurrent with the increase in the foundation levy that was introduced as a part of a total overall refinancing program for education in this province, divisions throughout the province, can she confirm that concurrent with what she says was an increase in the foundation levy there was a decrease in the spe cial levy throughout the province, the net effect of which was that only 5 out 58 divisions in the entire province ended up paying an increase in their tax mill rate levy last year,

whereas this year virtually every division in the province is going to pay a net increase in school mill rate on their property taxes? Can she confirm that? MR S. HE MPHILL: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member's question was related to the Foundation Program, and I would want to remind him that they removed the Foundation Program when they brought in the Educational Support Program. It doesn't exist and it didn't last year. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, approximately a year ago, the First Minister and the Leader of the Opposi tion said that the Conservative government had wasted millions of dollars on a needless Hydro rate freeze. He said that the money could better have been used to lower property taxes among other things. Does the First Minister intend to remove the hydro rate freeze? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, that question as well as the question of education tax and property is under review. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, I gather from the First Minister's answer that indeed he is looking at the possibility of removing the Hydro rate freeze and judging by the response of the Minister of Natural Resources that it should be removed; that the people of the province can look forward to the removal of that rate. Mr. Speaker, can the First Minister confirm that is indeed what he said, that he is looking at the possibil ity of removing it? MR. SPEA KER: Order please. 743 HON. WILSON PARA SIUK (Transcona): Mr.

Speaker, I think there is no secret that the technical staff in Manitoba Hydro for some time, indeed when the pre vious government was in power, had had some con cerns about the effects of a politically imposed rate freeze on the future rates that Manitoba Hydro con sumers would have to pay. They have raised that at the technical level, Mr. Speaker, and I have asked them to do the technical homework required and that they make a technical report to the board, and that that technical report be referred to me. Mr. Speaker, this is a matter that has to be dealt with at a technical level and that one indeed, Mr.

Speaker, cannot, like King Canute, try and hold back waves that in fact can drown you when those rates have to come off, if in fact they were an artificial imposition on Hydro and have hurt Hydro's position especially, Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that we have had two years of very low water levels that have in fact hurt Manitoba Hydro's financial position. MR. SPEAK ER: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister could advise the House and the people of Manitoba when we can expect a decision with respect to the government removing the Hydro rate freeze. MR.

PARASI UK : Mr. Speaker, there is no decision that will be taken in that by the government. This is a matter that will be put forward by the technical group. I would, in fact, bring in their report before the Legis lature. I would give the Opposition the opportunity of looking into that technical report when the Public Utilities Committee of the Legislature meets and then, Mr. Speaker, we would decide what to do from there. This may indeed be a matter that would most approp riately be dealt with by referring it to the Public Utili ties Board for a technical review by the Public Utilites Board, Mr. Speaker.

This is a matter that is very impor tant to the future of Manitoban's and shouldn't be dealt with in a crass political manner, Mr. Speaker, as it was dealt before. I think it is possible to deal with the whole matter of Hydro rates through a technical pro-

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 cess. Mr. Speaker. and that is the intention that we have right now and that is the process we are following. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. PAWLEY: On a point of order. I would ask the honourable member if he would have the courtesy of tabling the document he was reading from insofar as the statement that he alleges to myself. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker. I'd be happy to table this. it's the New Democratic Party Caucus dated April 9, 1981, and it's signed by Howard R. Pawley. -(Interjection)- In view of the fact, Mr.

Speaker, that the Minister of Energy and Mines would like to take the Hydro rate freeze question out of the political arena, can he confirm that when Mr. Cherniack, the Chairman of the Board, makes his report to the Minis ter that indeed the Minister will have to introduce

an Act into this Legislature to remove the Hydro rate freeze? MR. PARASUIK: The reports that will be passed on by Mr. Cherniack will be the technical report that will be prepared by the technical staff of Hydro under the direction of Mr. Blachford, the Chief Executive Officer of Manitoba Hydro, who is a technical person, Mr. Speaker, responsible for the technical work of all staff of Manitoba Hydro. That will be the report that will be forwarded on to me, Mr. Speaker, and that undoubt edly will be the report that will be looked at by the Public Utilities Committee of the Legislature of Manitoba. MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. The time for oral ques tion period has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. PENNER: Mr.

Speaker, just before calling for the continuation of the debate on the proposed motion No. 14, Interim Supply, I'd just like to point out that I've spoken the Opposition House Leader pointing out that on information received from the Deputy Min ister of Finance and the Minister of Finance, that respect to Interim Supply we're approaching the end of the year. -(Interjection)- Well, I want this as a matter of record, it's not really anything very amusing for those who have to receive their cheques, including the School Divisions, School Grant Payments of $70 million will have to be made by April 1st, or the School Divisions. about which we have heard a lot today, will be out of funds, and so too the Civil Service Payroll cheques at the end of next week.

I'm just pointing that out as a matter of record, with the hope that both sides of the House co-operate in moving this particular matter along, and therefore I'm asking that No. 14 be called for debate. 744 ADJOURNED DEBATES ON SECOND READING Bill NO. 14 - THE INTERIM APPROPRIATION ACT, 1982 MR. SPEAK ER: On the adjourned motion of the Honourable Minister of Finance, The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. RANSOM: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, on the same item that the Minister raised I simply would point out to the House that when an undertaking is made by this side of the House, through the House Leader, it is not necessary to put it on the record. MR. SPEAKER: On the adjourned debate, on the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Finance, Bill No. 14, the Honourable Member for Tur tle Mountain. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I adjourn this debate in order that my colleague, the Member for Arthur, could speak. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. JAMES E. DOWNEY (Arthur): Mr.

Speaker, I rise to speak on the Interim Supply and I think the point has to be made and made very clearly to the Govern ment House Leader, that I'm sure the spirit of co operative House operations and paying civil servants and funding of school boards will be honoured by members of this side of House, something that the members who are now in government didn't have the courtesy to do just some year ago when they felt that it was more important to try and make political hay at the betterment of innocent people of Manitoba, and it has to be very well understood, I'm sure, by those people who were deprived of their pay cheques on time a year ago.

So we, Mr. Speaker, I am sure, will honour the people who are dedicated citizens and will pay them in the proper manner. Mr. Speaker, question period today, I think, is a good example of what we have seen in the govern ment benches since the government took office. We have seen the First Minister, who all at once has taken on a new kind of a leadership role, something that I'm sure all the Manitobans have been waiting for for the last four months, where in fact he all at once thinks that he has all of the things running as nice and as smoothly as possible. Mr.

Speaker, in speaking again on Interim Supply, I think there are certain things to deal with the agricul tural community that are important, but also the economoy in general has to be talked about. I cannot remember - I'm not that old a person - but I cannot remember at any time in my history or my participation in the province when in fact we have seen a more depressed farm community, small busi ness community, in such a state of mind.

It is not and I don't want to use the term in the depths of a depres sion, but we are in a point of time when we are in what I would call not a positive approach to their businesses. We have seen the livestock industry in particular under a depressed price situation, the livestock, beef herds, the prices for beef, but let us look at some of the

23 March, 1982 other areas that we have to look at as well and that's those people who are dependent upon the farm community. The farm machine dealers who have normally at this time of year looked forward to the future sales of the farm equipment that they've ordered in some sev eral months before. The fact that they are unable to put forward the kind of deals that would be encourag ing for those farmers who would normally be buying equipment and we have, in fact, seen a stagnation in the other service industries that the agriculture and the other people throughout Manitoba would nor mally be a part of. Mr.

Speaker, when we look across the way and we hear the rhetoric from the government when they say we have this Small Business Relief Program or Inter est Relief Program, we have a Farm Interest Relief Program that they promised some several months ago. When you look at the chintzy amount of money and I use it as a chintzy amount of money because I think it will be known in the history of this province as the Minister of Agriculture and Autopac's Mickey Mouse program to help the economy of Manitoba. $23 million, Mr. Speaker, over a period of two years. What happened, Mr.

Speaker, when the Province of Manitoba some two years ago were faced with one of nature's worst blows that have been given to the peo ple of Manitoba? We first of all, Mr. Speaker, saw a flood that ravaged the whole of the Red River Valley; I believe there was a lake some 60 miles wide and right from the United States Boundary to the inlet of Lake Winnipeg. Mr.

Speaker, we saw the First Minister of the day and his Cabinet and his colleagues respond to the needs of the people and have been paying for those costs ever since, the dyking programs; not so concerned about making political hay, but making real and effective programs to help the people in those affected areas. The members opposite are laughing, Mr. Speaker, but they'll be laughing a little bit different when they find out how far $23 million goes over 30,000 farmers and the numbers of small business people and the homeowners in this province.

When they have some 29,000 farmers who are still waiting for an Interest Relief Program and only 1,000 may have qualified for what I would consider a no-help program to start with. Mr. Speaker, the following year we had one of the most severe droughts and forest fires in the Province of Manitoba. It wasn't a political reaction to the people of Manitoba as we're seeing come from the New Democratic government. There were some $40-odd million, Mr. Speaker, applied to the farm community, applied to all those people, any person who needed help and there wasn't any bureaucratic hoops to put them through.

There wasn't a matter of having to say that I'm about to lose my livestock operation or my farm, that I'm right down and out. Government, feed me a little more of this succulent thing that the NOP government have. No, Mr. Speaker, the First Minister of the province, now the Leader of the Opposition unfortunately, responded with his cabinet and his government, not to make the political hay that the people opposite are trying to make with their Mickey Mouse program. Mr. Speaker, they understood the needs of the peo ple of Manitoba. That wasn't only to help the farm community, the people on the farm.

It was to help the packing house industry in the City of Winnipeg and the City of Brandon. It was to help, Mr. Speaker, the industries of the farm machinery people where farmers were buying equipment. -(Interjection)- Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture will find out very shortly when he may have and I use this figure very carefully and he isn't even giving us the information. For an open government, he isn't even telling us how many farmers have got one red cent out of it. So let's just use those figures.

There are 30,000 farmers in Manitoba and I will make an estimate that there won't be a thousand farmers receive interest relief and I don't know one farmer that doesn't need it, Mr. Speaker. -(Interjection)- Now, he's hedging. He's fudging and he's backing up to the wall. Why, Mr.

Speaker, don't they put a program in place that all the farmers can qualify for and all the businessmen can qualify for and all the housing people can qualify for? 745 There's an individual the other way, I believe it was the First Minister said, you're giving us the dickens for not spending money or for spending too much money and not putting in programs. Mr. Speaker, it is they that can't have it both ways and I'm sure that it won't take very long until they find out exactly why they can't. They can't have it both ways, Mr. Speaker.

I go back and make reference to a program when we ran into a very difficult time and a shortage of hay and fodder, Mr. Speaker, and there was a member oppo site at that particular time and it was the spring of the year, a little later on, but as we moved along into the situation we put programs in place, but the member opposite who's now the Minister said, why don't you let those cattlemen get into those Crown Lands? He said, let's let the farmers on the land. What's the first policy that he changed, Mr.

Speaker, to take that land back away from the people; to cancel Crown Land sales; to do exactly what he said shouldn't be done when he was sitting on this side of the House. He can't have it both ways, Mr. Speaker. He's saying on one hand, let the farmers into the land and let them use it, Mr. Speaker, and what does he do now? The first policy that he's introduced is, we'll freeze the sales of land to farmers. Mr. Speaker, that's the Crown Land policy.

Then we go to the supporting, the real program that was helping farmers with interest relief because there is an interest relief program in our Manitoba Agricul tural Credit Corporation where a person who has land and remember this, that if you're going to lose your farm, it's the land they take away, Mr. Speaker. But this Interest Relief Program of the Minister of Agricul ture doesn't qualify for land incurred debts. I don't know where he expects the farmer to live; on the road allowance, Mr. Speaker? Is that where he expects all the farmers of the future to live on? No, that's right, Mr. Speaker.

That is right; that's for wildlife. But, Mr. Speaker, the very program that was meant to help the farm community with an interest relief through MACC, where in fact, the first $50,000 of debt, the interest rate on that was reduced by 4 per cent and he cancelled that. How can he go to the farm community and the people of Manitoba and say he's got an Emergency Relief Program in place when in fact he cancelled one of the best programs that this province has ever seen. He's looking at it, Mr. Speaker.

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 What is he looking at, Mr. Speaker. He's looking at the fact the private enterpriser, the farmer who all his life built this country, fed the people and they did it through private ownership and private enterprise. There's one other area I want to talk on and I will be communicating directly by letter to the Minister because there are a few innocent people that got caught in a situation under their old land-lease pro gram. Mr.

Speaker, the members opposite had a pro gram where they bought the land and leased it to the farmer; now, after pressure in the House from the Conservative Party and probably there was one Lib eral left in this country at that time - they're now a distinction and thank God they are, they're distinct in the western part of this country and they will be elimi nated in the eastern part after -(lnterjection) extinct, that's right, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, it's the stink that's coming from the other side of the House that I have to worry about, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, I'm glad the Minister corrected me on the word "distinct." Mr. Speaker, the program which the member oppo site, and I hope he pays some attention to the com munication that I sent in a letter because it's impor tant. There are some individuals, and he immediately says if they didn't buy the land they wouldn't have been in this problem, well, if they hadn't bought the land they wouldn't have had a capital gain to worry about which would have helped them in these dire times. An individual, Mr.

Speaker -and it's important that he listen to this -an individual went into the land-lease program, the government bought the land from the individual, leased it back to him, leased that land back to him; now the individual, because of the economic conditions, wants to sell this particular piece of prop erty and make a capital gain. Well, under the rules of the old Land-Lease Program, and I'm sincere about this and we were considering what we could do to make it change, under the rules of the old Land Lease Program, Mr. Speaker, that individual would have to pay back the capital gain to the province. Mr.

Speaker, the details I won't get into, but the principle, Mr. Speaker, is what we have to deal with. I believe those individuals, and I would support the Minister if he would assess it in this way, those people probably need help worse than anybody else today because they are now in a situation where they owe a lot of money; not just to the province, but they owe it to other people. Mr. Speaker, I believe it should be the responsibility of the province to look at those cases and reassess their policy of having to pay back all of that capital gain, and I say "all" to the province. Mr.

Speaker, those individuals are caught in a very difficult situation. They, Mr. Speaker, have as much right to have consideration on that as one of the other -and maybe it isn't a broken election promise yet but we haven't heard much about it and I'm going to bring it for the first time to this House since the election. The now Premier of the province in the election campaign said that the Province of Manitoba, when we're elected, will refund the capital gain to the farmers of Manitoba. Where is it? Have you announced your program, is it in your Estimates?

Remember that elec tion pledge for those retiring farmers. that the provin cial share of the capital gain would be refunded to those people who were retiring? Are you pleased that 746 I reminded you? I hope that you are, Mr. Minister because you shant forget. If it's as fair to give those people back the money, I agree, I think those other people who are in that particular difficult situation should have some consideration given to them. I would watch for his actions in that regard. -(Inter jection)- No, Mr.

Speaker, this individual will be retir ing but he will be working at something else because, in fact, he's in a financial situation. He's not the only one, there are quite a few, Mr. Speaker, and I know the Minister is aware of them. Mr. Speaker, we have the individual who is now the Minister of Communications and what is he doing? What is he doing, and this I have to be quite honest with the people of Manitoba and Members of this Legislative Assembly, for a member. old landslide from Thompson over here, Mr. Speaker. he can give them a satellite dish because they live in Northern Manitoba.

But, what about my constituents in south westerm Manitoba? What about the constituents for the Member for Russell and Roblin? What about the Member for Dauphin, Mr. Speaker, does he not have enough intestinal fortitude to stand up and say to his Minister of Community Service and Telephones, we want the same kind of communication facilities and systems in southern Manitoba that they're given in the north. We're second-class citizens, Mr.

Speaker, when it comes to the Member for Brandon East, the Minister responsible for the Telephone System. and he didn't have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and answer a question in this House, Mr. Speaker. Where is he, Mr. Speaker; why hasn't he got enough backbone, Mr. Speaker, enough class to treat us all equally? Yet he is the great man who is supportive of non-discriminatory legislation, you know. Mr. Speaker, he wants every thing equal. Well, I would support him, Mr.

Speaker, but I would like the people of southern, western, northern, Interlake, Outerlake, in the lake, whatever lake, I'd like to see him give the same services to all the people of Manitoba and not just old landslide from Thompson. Mr. Speaker, what did we give to Thompson? We gave them a tremendous market for all the metals that come out of that mine, Mr. Speaker. Where does he think the metal goes; does he think it goes into the spacearm that is out in space right now, like he is, he is spaced out most of the time, Mr. Speaker. It goes into farm machinery, it goes into all those things that peo ple do.

You know, forthe Member for Thompson who wants to put himself on that own little island, he is a member of a community that I am very proud of because I think that's as much a part of my community as southern Manitoba is a part of his; I think we have to work in that way, Mr. Speaker. -(Interjection)- Mr. Speaker, that's right, we had a man who represented that city very well. But, you know, for the people in that community, for the people in the labour movement of which I'm not against, they've got collective rights to protect them selves.

Every time we turn around they're demanding more out of the system; and what are they putting back into the system? Are they putting back an equal amount so that we can all do better? We're starting to see some moves take place. We're seeing some of the automotive agreements where the labour unions are now negotiating with those people who are helping

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 the management, they're backing off a little bit. What are the farm community doing yesterday? What did they do yesterday, I ask the Member for Thompson, what did they do when they said we'll have to maintain the same price for most of the Wheat Board grains? Did they stand up and they roar and they say we're going on strike? No, Mr. Speaker, they're committed people, committed food producers, so that man can put metal, or the people in labour can put metal into hopper cars, put metal into machinery, and make the economy go.

They didn't stand up and say they needed 15 percent, because that's the inflationary rate. Certainly they need it, but for a period of time they're prepared to maintain the same price. In fact, you'll hear most the farm people say today, we were satisfied with the price and just happy that it didn't go down. Well, it did go down, Mr. Speaker, on two grains and I was interested yesterday to hear the First Minis ter comment on the fact that he wasn't sure, but he thought his Minister of Agriculture had input into the initial price announcement. Mr.

Speaker, the Minister sitting here, I'm sure didn't even say to the Federal Minister responsible for the Wheat Board, that we should have more money. I would be interested in the communications between the Minister of Agriculture for the Province of Mani toba with the Federal Minister of the Wheat Board. Mr. Speaker, there were some consultations that took place between our government and the Federal Government in those areas. One, Mr.

Speaker, was to encourage the announcement of that payment to come earlier and I am sure the farm community are pleased that announcement was made and made so they could make decisions prior to spring. Well, Mr. Speaker, the Minister is sitting there, I hope he's listening because I hope that he does have some input into the development of policy at the national level. Mr. Speaker, about two years ago and I say that, the Ministers of Agriculture met at that par ticular time and I would hope he would continue on with this policy, because he'll get support from the Federal Minister of Agriculture.

When it comes to the development of policy for agriculture in this country, the control of the Canadian Wheat Board, that it should answer to the Federal Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Speaker, and it should also have input from the provincial Ministers of Agriculture because of the importance of that particular segment on our farm community. The best way, Mr.

Speaker, that can be done is to have direct policy input and that would alleviate and it would help this particular Minister of Agriculture from becoming a Fed-basher, which he doesn't think is proper, but what happens imme diately when the Canadian Wheat Board to go change the feed grain policy? He blamed the Wheat Board, Mr. Speaker. It was the Wheat Board that had taken the initiative to change away from the current compet itive pricing of feed grain in western Canada and the Minister of Manitoba Agriculture stands up, he's a great big brave man and he goes after the Wheat Board for backing off.

It wasn't the Wheat Board, Mr. Speaker, that backed off. It was the Federal Minister of Agriculture and the Federal Minister responsible for the Wheat Board that backed off, but he didn't say anything to our friend the Minister responsible for the Wheat Board, because he 747 comes from the same union, the Farmers' Union of western Canada, speaking for the left wing. He couldn't give him what for. No, Mr. Speaker, we do have to have input in a meaningful way from the Minister of Agriculture to what is the responsibility or to what will affect the farm community. Mr.

Speaker, I want to touch again on one of the other areas that is of urgent concern and that of course and we've touched on it earlier, in the difficult times that not only the beef produces are having, all the farmers are having. Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, never before have we seen the difficulties in this province that we're seeing today with the extreme high costs of production, particularly energy. Mr. Speaker, we're seeing the lower returns in the lives tock industry particularly the beef cattle, we have got I think a good program in place for the dairy industry in this province.

I am pleased that we were part of a government that established a new mechanism for the pricing of milk in this province. Mr. Speaker, you haven't heard the consumers and the dairy producers doing battle over whether the price should go up or down. There's a mechanism in place that allows that to happen. Mr. Speaker, we never hear the Minister saying it's good, bad or indif ferent or maybe the Minister of Agriculture's going to change back to the old system. That should be a question, I'll keep that in the back of my mind for some time.

Is he going to change back to the Dairy Board where the producers have to go to the public to make a case, or does he think that the mechanism that's in place today is working well? Again another change which I am pleased we have been able to put in place for the dairy industry of this province so that the young children, for the needy people in the City of Winnipeg, Brandon and Thompson have a sufficient supply of milk because the dairy producers are able to make a fair and honest return. Mr. Speaker, I think that's the kind of province we want for the people of Manitoba.

Let us just talk briefly about the beef industry. -(Interjection)- I'm happy to have the Minister deal with the dairy industry. I'm sure that he'll end up right in the middle of the butter. Mr. Speaker, we'll wait until he gets into the egg issue before he gets egg on the face. Mr. Speaker, if he doesn't feel that he's competent however and he and his government want to resign, I'm sure that there are a lot of qualified people here who are quite prepared to face up to the challenges and the opportunities that are in Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, we want to talk briefly about the beef industry although the Minister has given me his assu rance, he's given the people of Manitoba his assu rance, that he's coming forward with a program to help the beef industry. Mr. Speaker, it's something like a lot of other election promises. Where is it, Mr. Speaker? We have not seen any indication other than the fact that he fired a producer board and, you know, we've got to look at this. It wasn't a political board. The board that was appointed, Mr. Speaker, came from the Manitoba cattle producers.

They have named the people, but maybe because the Minister of Agricul ture fought so hard against the establishment of a beef association in this province, maybe he has on the back burner and maybe it's closer to the front burner,

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 the repealing of the legislation. Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Agri culture of the provin ce today planning to repeal or to back off on that association? I would think those are the kinds of important policy issues that the people of Manitoba want to know, the farm community, other than just the cancelling of a Crown land sale policy, the stopping of lending money to farmers that already had an interest-relief program and it helped our young people, Mr. Speaker. He's the backward Minister, Mr. Speaker.

He's back ing up and it's not a time to back up; it's time to go ahead and do things that are going to help the people of Manitoba. Another election promise that has been broken as far as the beef industry is concerned, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if you could indicate just how much time I have left because I have quite an area. MR. SPE AKER: The honourable member has 15 minutes remaining. MR. DOWN EY: Mr. Speaker, there's another area that I think is very critical to the people of Manitoba, not just the farm community, but to all the people of Mani toba.

What have we seen happen in the past few years in this province, in this country in fact? This, Mr. Speaker, is an issue that I think is going to be rede bated, debated and go down in history books as prob ably one of the most detrimental things that this coun try has faced and another reason why we're in the kind of critical situation we're in today with our total econ omy, not just the Province of Manitoba, not just the country of Canada, but to all of the world.

It relates directly to what we talked about earlier, the questions on the hydro, the hydro rate freeze, and how impor tant that was to the people of Manitoba. During the time, Mr. Speaker, that the OPEC coun tries were blackmailing the rest of the world - yes, I believe that the OPEC countries were not charging a fair and equitable return for their investment. Mr. Speaker, it had nothing to do with the whole devel opment of a world or the common need to get along and to share and work equitably together. No, Mr. Speaker, they took a hold of the rest of the world and they said, we will make them pay. Mr.

Speaker, I don't believe there's any Canadian, any Manitoban, that would suggest that anybody in the farm community should do that. What other more important form of energy, and that's what we're talking about, we're talking about a nonrenewable form of energy versus a renewable and the most important form and that of course, is food, because what would the other fuel mean if we didn't have food? It would mean it could be 1 O cents a barr el because there's be nobody around to use it. So, Mr. Speaker, we have to keep everything in it's proper perspective. And I think, Mr.

Speaker, the OPEC countries of the world blackmailed everyone. What happened, Mr. Speaker, since 1973, and we look back when we started to see the effects of increased energy prices; we started to see inflation take off on all the prod uction equipment; we started seeing the wage demands go up because of the costs of the cars and all those things that people put their prio rities on, Mr. Speaker. Yes, Mr. Speaker, '73 was about the time when we started into this world of inflated prices. And 748 yes, Mr. Speaker, there were a certain group and eve ryone was living fairly well on it And yes, Mr.

Speaker, I think those oil prices were the main reason for it. How, Mr. Speaker, and when, do we see some relief to what has happened? Well, Mr. Speaker, I think there are some, maybe not overly encouraging signs taking place, but I think if one were to read the Manitoba Co-operator editorial this week it does touch on a few of the important issues. We are now seeing and we've heard in the news recently that we are in fact in a surplus position today in the world as far as oil is concerned. The oil producers are having to put their commodity on the market the same as the wheat producers are.

They're having to take spot prices and there is a crumbling, a breaking down of the mechanism that blackmailed us. But you know, Mr. Speaker, in Canada we aren't going to be able to enjoy some of those effects of what's happening at the world-market level. You know why, Mr. Speaker? Because of government greed, Mr. Speaker; because they mismanaged national government. Mr. Speaker, we are seeing the tip of the iceberg in Manitoba today, of the same kind of a government, with the same kind of a philosophy - to do what, Mr. Speaker?

To load on the backs of the taxpayers, the producers, and everyone in this province - remember this, to load the taxpayers in this province - down with one more layer of energy producing tax, or mechanism, or structure, or equip ment, Mr. Speaker. And that, Mr. Speaker, is a very dangerous tunnel to go down, because what we are seeing happening today at the world level, and I think it's giving a few people a little bit of encouragement, that we're seeing the price of oil start to come lower. But in Canada, Mr. Speaker, the government at the national level have built on so many taxes, Mr.

Speaker, have used the taxpayer through, I would say without choice, without their willingness to pay for those taxes by the very fact that we need the gas and the oils that come out of the pumps that we drive up to. Mr. Speaker, the government will not be able to lower the price of gas in Canada, in Manitoba, because of the taxation policies that are on top of us. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is a very dangerous, dan gerous route to go on, because, Mr.

Speaker, you eliminate those people who are buying the fuels, the engines that power and make things go, you're elimi nating them because you're breaking them with excess taxes. We, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, will not see the benefits of reducing world oil prices. We will not, Mr. Speaker, see the benefits of reducing world oil prices because we have governments today, pro vincial and federal, who are using that particular mechanism, or that particular need, or that particular resource, I should say, that is demanded by the public. And who is hurt the worst, Mr. Speaker?

It's the consumer that's hurt the worst; it's not the govern ment that sets it up. You know, it's all this phoney baloney about we're going to make it a Canadian owned organization - PetroCan, a Canadian-owned organization. It won't be any more Canadian-owned, Mr. Speaker, than the ManOil from across the way. Zurich will own it. Mr. Speaker, what are we talking about with ManOil? We're talking about direct taxa tion of the people, whether they want to pay or not,

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 Mr. Speaker, direct taxation; taking the money from the hands of the produ cers, of the pocketbooks of those people who are needing that resource and doing what, Mr. Speaker? Pu tting it into a busi ness that they have no ability to run , Mr. Speaker, as a taxpayer, no choice in how it's run or operated. Mr. Speaker, I think I've used this before but it'll be interesting to see as the mechanism of government gets so involved, and we get so much red tape, so much bureauc racy operating the service stations of PetroCan, and you can't pour gas if you can't speak both languages, Mr. Speaker.

We have the bureau cracy that wants to close the shop at five o'clock. At five o'clock in the afternoon if you need your tank full of gas, oil, where are you going to get it, Mr. Speaker? Because, Mr. Speaker, remember this, the very people that are paying the costs and the wages are the tax payers that are out using private initiative to produce the funds that make the whole system work. You know, it's very amazing and I want to touch briefl y on hydro. I want to touch briefly on hydro because it is an important resou rce, the most impor tant resource that we have.

What did we do when we were in government, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker, I thought I heard a member from the opposite say: no thing. Well, the Member for Dau phin better to home to his constituents and ask them directly.

And I want it in his next press release when he puts it out, telling them that he's going to put the hydro rates up by double, by triple, that everybody that has now bou ght an electric fu rnace for their house, that he's going to be respon sible for changing that electric fu rnace back to prices that should be starting to come down, but because of his philosophy and the philosophy of the national government are taxing those people that have to heat their hou ses in this cou ntry, Mr. Speaker. Let him tell the people of Dau phin, or let the rest of those members tell their constituents it's their policy.

It's their policy that un freezes, or will unfreeze the hydro rates in this province. That, Mr. Speaker, won't wash and we are going to see from this side of the House that it won't wash. Yes, the people of Manitoba made a decision to elect a government who are so kind and caring. Well, Mr. Speaker, the only way that they can be kind and caring and treat their own people are to tax them and take that money away. Mr. Speaker, time will tell, and it's going to be interesting when the Minister of Finance lays the Bu dget before the people of the Province of Manitoba.

When he says, on one hand we'll give you this, and on this hand we'll take it away from you so we can do it with the other hand. Mr. Speaker, it'll be an interesting speech and I'm sure the Attorney General right now has had a lot of expe rience with those kinds of systems, so will probably be writing the text for the Minister of Finance. I'm sure that that's the kind of thing that washes very well with him. Mr. Speaker, it's important that the people of the province know that they can get involved in the oil bus iness without doing it through state money, through tax dollars. They, Mr.

Speaker, can get into the bu siness of producing oil without the big govern ment doing it. Mr. Speaker, I'm afraid they'll be into it and not only will they be paying for PetroCan when they go up to the service station, they'll be paying for 749 ManOil, they'll be paying for all those things, that without having a tax system, without having that sys tem in place, the government have the right through their taxation policies to extract the money they need to build the roads and do everything else without adding that other layer of government to peoples' lives.

And you know it's going to be interesting to watch that because I happen to have a fairly major interest, not financially, unfortu nately, in the area in this province where there has been a lot of oil devel opment. And you hear the Minister of Energy, and I respect him, he sent me a copy of the sur face rights, it's very interesting. He sent me a copy, he sent the Member for Virden a copy. Because of government restraint he could only put nine of them on the table and maybe nobody's interested in them.

But you know for that great money-generating oil bus iness that he's going to start, and pay for all the social programs that the members opposite want, he's start ing out in a pretty slow way, because it doesn't take very much time when you're drilling of oil wells, and tying up of leases, leasing of leases fairly ineq uitably to use up a lot of money. Or maybe, Mr. Speaker, the government opposite have another idea, another way of extracting away the oil rights, or the mineral rights of the people of this province. It's starting to come out . The Member for River East suggests maybe a mineral acreage tax.

You know the old mineral acreage tax, the 10-cent-an-acre bu siness. Now that wasn't to generate any money. Mr. Speaker, that wasn't to gen erate revenue, that was to extract the mineral rights of the people of the Province of Manitoba, which by the way are 80-percent owned by the people of the Prov ince of Manitoba. Nobody spits on that, Mr. Speaker. Any company that wants to come in can lease any land, there's lots of places to drill for oil. You don't have to go into it as a state operation. Mr.

Speaker, the point that has to be made and made very clearly, that if they proceed to again layer the cost of producing or getting in the oil bu siness on top of the PetroCan costs on top of the Petrofina, Mr. Speaker, where are we going to be at as a nation, where are we going to be at as a province, Mr. Speaker, when are we ever going to be able to lift our heads high and say we're proud, private, free, investing individ uals who make this thing go? Mr. Speaker, their goal is to drag us all into that state-owned organization, not by choice, but by force through our taxation policies.

I want to put just one thing on the record, and I think it's very important. Our policies as a government, Mr. Speaker, when we were on that side of the House, were to create an environment so that everyone could excel to their maximum, do those things that you would expect to do in a free cou ntry. And when it comes, Mr. Speaker, to our energy policy we believe in removing some of the energy taxes off of Canadian produced alcohol, Mr. Speaker, so that it could be put into the gasolines and extend the fossil fuels that we're going to be and have been short off. But , Mr.

Speaker, they don't understand that, they don't understand that you remove taxes so people do things and generate more tax wealth. That's reverse to them. And you hearthe First Minister keep saying, the big problem with our economy, the big problem here in Canada today, isn't Pierre Elliot Trudeau and his screwed-up mind, but is Reaganomics. At the same

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 time he's trying to sell them hydro, be a nice guy to the United States of America and sell them hydro, and, Mr. Speaker, not tell this House where he's at on the Garrison. Mr. Speaker, it won't wash and we're going to tell the people of Manitoba exactly what they believe in. MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERM AN: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Lakeside, that the debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. PENNER: Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Economic Development, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOT ION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honour able Member for Flin Flon in the Chair for the Depart ment of Northern Affairs; and the Honourable Member for The Pas in the Chair for the Department of Natural Resources. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - NATURAL RESOURCES MR. CHAIRMAN, Harry M.

Harapiak (The Pas): We will call the committee to order. We're on Regional Services of Natural Resources, No. 12. (a)

(1) Salaries. The Honourable Minister. MR. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, before we start a detailed review of this

section of the department, let me introduce to the members - not too many members here, but the quality are here obviously - Mr. Ernie Pasickla, Regional Director and let me in a few brief words outline basically the activities of this branch. This

section deals with the whole question of administration or enforcement of The Wildlife Act, provisions in respect to regional services in every

section of the department's activities. Let me by read ing a few of the notes in respect to activities outline the major activities: Emphasize training and development of adminis trative personnel to improve performance and response to financial management requirements, placed a greater level of direct accountability for cost control at the regional level, provided a higher level of training, supervision and improved communication in relation to financial management.

To improve staff morale, introduced line management liaison commit tee and a program of field staff participation and con tribution recruitment training, development and standards. Continued a program of upgrading field 750 equipment to improve field efficiency and perfor mance. Introduction of program budgeting cost con trol analysis at the resource district level. Moved regional headquarters and staff for the Interlake Region to Gimli and the Eastern region to Beausejour from Winnipeg. Let me just indicate the highlights of various sec tions. The general overview, Mr.

Chairman, of the program is that under this appropriation there is over all support for the Park Ranger and Conservation Officer program, the Field Service Offices within these various regions and special programs and ser vices such as problem wildlife control, forest fire management, the department communication pro gram, firearms safety and guide training, legislation services, safety and security programs. All of these are provided under this Regional Services Program. The overall program is community-oriented and it is the department's delivery system for resource pro grams in the field. That, Mr.

Chairman, I think gives the members a kind of quick overview as to what this

section is all about. MR. CHAIRMAN: 12. (a) (1)- pass the Member for Lakeside. MR. HARRY ENNS (Lakeside): Mr. Chairman, I think it would be correct to say that in some ways we have discussed the affairs of Regional Services in going through the different individual branches. I appre ciate the latitude that the Chair has given us and that you have given us, as Minister, to do that. I would like to ask the Minister several questions at this particular time, again recognizing that he may not have had the full opportunity to acquaint himself with the subject matters that I wish to deal with.

The Department of Natural Resources and perhaps this division of Regional Services epitomizes the very extensive reorganization that took place in the department over the past two-and-a-half, three years now I suppose. The delivery system of services by the various divisions within the department have, in my judgment, been more clearly defined. I would be less than candid if I didn't suggest that whenever reorgan ization takes place, it has attendant with it some diffi cult moments, some difficult problems relative to staff.

Staff like anybody else doesn't always appre ciate change particularly if the change is of a very fundamental nature in terms of the status of staff, at least as perceived either in the minds of the staff themselves or to some extent, the public. I refer to the kind of changes that have taken place within the Parks Branch relative to the delivery of service, now by Regional Services as well as in the Engineering Con struction Branch, etc. That runs through the whole department and was, of course, the intent of a very substantial reorganization. I say to you, Mr.

Minister, that your department probably underwent a more substantive and major reorganizational change during the past two-and-a half, three years than any other government depart ments. Other departments have from time to time been associated with different Ministries, have been halved off or added to depending on the perception of the government of the day as to how they wanted to

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 handle things, but there was in this case in the Department of Natural Resources, a very major reor ganization undertaken. As I said in the outset, the question may not be fair at this particular time, but it would be I think of interest certainly to members of the Opposition and I suspect to the members of your own department as to whether you have had any opportunity, Mr. Minister, to acquaint yourself with some of those reorganizations and how you feel about the department as it is cur rently structured? MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, I have become aware of the fact that major shifts, adjustments and so on were made in this department in the last several years and the honourable member is quite correct in indi cating that those changes did not come about without some inconvenience to some members of the staff. I haven't as yet made any qualitative or quantitative assessment as to how those changes will better facili tate delivery of program.

I know that it's the desire of government to co-ordinate program and its delivery so that there is efficiency and directness and some times these changes are necessary and I quite can didly say that I haven't had an opportunity to really evaluate what these changes I know that I've met with some people who indicated some unhappiness but the die had been cast so far that very well couldn't return it. But we will be looking at that, and of course, if some of these changes are such that we want to re-evaluate at a later time, of course that's open to us. MR. ENNS : Mr.

Chairman, the Department of Regional Services of course is charged with the, perhaps the most onerous responsibility in that department, and that is of course in being in the front lines, if you like, and in instances where necessary apprehend or press for prosecutions of citizens of our province that abuse the laws regarding our resources. I would ask the Minister whether or not he has can supply the com mittee with some information about perhaps the area that is the most ticklish for the department to handle and that is to press for prosecutions when Treaty Indian people are involved?

Are there any pending prosecutions that the department is currently involved in? MR. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I think that I can indicate an affirmative answer to that. I won't go into any detail in respect to those matters because it would be improper for me to do so. Let me just indicate that through my Deputy Minister I have indicated to the staff that certainly we want to enforce our game laws and we want to do that in a responsible and proper manner.

We want to encourage within all of the peo ple of Manitoba an understanding and respect for the requirements 01' game protection and protection of our resources. We want to exercise tact and diplo macy and try, by our example of diplomacy, tact and understanding of people, to gain a greater respect for protection of our resources. Where it is necessary to do so, of course, prosecutions must be pursued but I think we'll win a great deal more support for protec tion of our resources if we practise tact and diplomacy. During some of the earlier questions in respect, Mr.

Chairman, of other areas have resource management, 751 wildlife section, I've indicated that our staff is actively engaged in discussions with people who are naturally very concerned about our wildlife resource and par ticularly with some of our Native people. We believe that emphasis is going to pay off in better understand ing. The emphasis that we are placing within the department is prevention against wildlife abuse, rather than enforcement. MR. EN NS: Mr. Chairman, the Estimates indicate no substantial rise in dollars allocated for the division in virtually all regions.

It would appear that normal infla tionary costs are all that are being added to the Esti mates. A short while ago the Manitoba citizens were informed, by one way or another, of what you, sir, described in the House as serious abuses of our wild life laws that accounted for a substantial amount of illegal trade in wild meats, poaching both in the fish ing end of it and in the game end of it. Are there any specific plans? I appreciate, Mr.

Chairman, it would be wrong for you to talk about specific prosecutions or actions that the government is currently engaged in, but how does your Director of Regional Services intend to get at the abuses that were brought to light in the Legislature a week or two ago by yourself, sir? MR. MACKLI NG: Mr. Chairman, for the record as the honourable member recalls, I didn't bring these mat ters to light in the Legislature. They were unfortu nately brought to light prematurely by people outside of the Legislature indicating that they had found this information and thought that it was very newsworthy.

The information was in the form of a preliminary investigative report upon which the department was engaged as a basis for further initiatives which hope fully would have had a much more pronounced effect in dealing with some of the unlawful sale of game that is going in the province. The release of this prelimi nary document that the department had been working on, preliminary report, was most unfortunate because, in effect, it exposed to public review what the depart ment had been doing in a careful way without tipping its hand to the poachers and the illegal game sellers.

We now are faced with the fact that those people who were engaged in these activities know that the department is exercising greater surveillance in respect to it so that, no doubt, wilf have an effect on our ability to secure more convictions than already have been obtained. One charge was laid in respect to one individual that was observed involved in this activ ity and the charge was laid. The case was determined by the Courts and a fine imposed. It's an ongoing process. It's been going on, I suppose, in this province since game laws were put in place.

There seems to be much more of it, probably as a result of the times in which we live where meat is very expensive and even fish is very expensive. There are a great many more of our citizens unemployed and these combined effects add to the desire and the unfortunate unlawful behaviour. In respect to how we can cope with it, well there isn't a great many more staff but I'm assured that we have provided a good deal more mobility to staff. We're looking at upgrading of equipment and so on and we're really therefore addressing the problems with a

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 little bit more efficiency. We are also utilizing inter regional personnel, that is we're combining personnel from one region perhaps in another region, where we're following up on an investigation. The effect of this is, Mr. Chairman, that the department is zeroing in on areas and on problems where there is some signif icant abuse and through a more intensive effort on the part of staff getting at some of the more serious problems. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lakeside. MR. EN NS: Well, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that's an ongoing problem that is not easily solved.

I would ask the Minister whether or not the department, particu larly in its reorganized status, has any particular plans afoot to redouble its effort to involve the general pub lic in helping them in this solution. And I'm referring specifically to the many game and fish organizations that we have in the pr ovince. Mr.

Chairman, I appre ciate that not every member of a game and fish asso ciation has the qualifications or could be dubbed if you like, a deputy to the services of this particular branch, but at least I believe at the official level in the context with the organization's executives in the chal lenging of the associations across Manitoba, and we have many -I think the total membership exceeds 14, 15, 16 thousand. Perhaps the Minister can give me that figure at this particular time.

But I know there is a constant need to engage the good will, the support of the very people that are in the field, if you like, in far greater numbers than our enforcement people.

Now I certainly include all those that are enjoying our wilds and our nature who are not sportsmen necessarily, but it seems to me that there's a special opportunity or onus to involve through the department making themselves accessible to these organizations, sup porting their many functions, and continually taking ad vantages of education opportunities by way of example, by ways of providing guest speakers, by ways of encouraging in one way or another, and acknowledging assistance when it's in fact pro vided by the general public through these associations.

The geography of Manitoba is such that it will just not be possible for you, sir, or any government to have officers situated on every

section of land or in every area to the point where these offences could be by sheer numbers curtailed. It requires a responsible public attitude towards these resources, and that, to me, seems to be a particular challenge that this por tion of your department faces in trying to foster. MR. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman, I certainly concur with the honourable member's concern in respect to the need for wide base of public support in respect to the efforts of the department.

And the department is very cognizant of that and regional managers have been instructed and are becoming more involved with communities in which they oper ate, in which they live. They have been advised to be involved and parti cipate and attend in respect to issues related to the activities of game associations, fire, schools, educational program in respect to natu ral resource information and so on. There is no ques tion, but all of that helps to develop a proper atmos phere for game pr otection conservation and general 752 resource conservation and protection.

In respect to having members of game and fish associations and so oninvolved in forcing The Wildlife Act; we are not enthusiastic about that because that would involve the potential civil liability to individual members who may be unt rained in respect to the specific Act, the regulations and we don't want to encourage people that are not being paid to put them selves out to public liability. The thrust is at more public information and promotion and understanding of our game laws. I might say that even though I haven't been Minister for that long, I have had a meet ing with the Manitoba Wildlife Federation.

I have met with the wildlife groups from Southeast Manitoba and have already met with a group from the Interlake and all of these people are most concerned about wildlife management. They want to see more wildlife habitat; not less; they want to see Crown lands, not posted against hunting and I have assured them in respect to that question, that it is not the policy of this govern ment to post Crown lands such that individual hunters are going to be barred from using Cr own lands for game hunting. MFI. ENNS: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I would like to just engage the Minister in one more subject for awhile that I think more and more people that have had an opportunity to be involved in anyway, such as I have had in the department recognize that somebody, a government is going to have the courage of their convictions to do something about it. I am referring to the method, the means that are employed in the harv esting of game in an illegal way, jacklighting, of course being perhaps the most popular one.

I, myself, am an Interlake resident and it becomes painfully obvious to anybody that it's a very difficult job for the Regional Services Branch to curtail what I think we should be directing a lot of our attention to and that is the illegal outlawing, or making it illegal to take game in a certain way, by all Manitoba citizens. I cannot avoid touching on the Treaty rights of our Native citizens in discussing this matter.

Biologists will tell you that all the good biological decisions that are made by the branch as to what type of species can or should be harvested whether it's bucks only and so forth are all for nought when up to 80 or 90 percent of the animals are shot in the dark of night under the beam of a jacklight. Mr . Minister, I believe that the time has come for very serious high level negotiations to talk about the method that is employed in the illegal taking of game.

We always get hung up in this coun try, in this province, and rightfully so, I'm not suggest ing otherwise, the specific rights that are granted to our Native community but, Mr. Chairman, the opera tions of this branch make it extremely difficult for them, on the one hand, to apprehend me or the Member for Arthur if we're employing an illegal method of hunting game and be able to sort that out if I happen to be a Treaty Indian. In fact, the branch often finds itself in a position of being accused of harassment if they pursue that course.

I just think that in the interests of all, the question of how and by what means game is taken in this province surely has to be addressed. It's not a question of who can and when. It's the same as in the fisheries busi ness; we've more or less accepted the fact that there

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 are, for biological reaso ns, certain mesh sizes of nets that can be taken and any others whether they are being used and handled by Treaty Indians or whether they're being handled by commercial fishermen or casual domestic permits, are lifted by our enforce ment agents and at least they can go on the lake, measure the net, if it's an illegal net, the person is charged or the person is warn ed. The means of taking the game, in this case, fish, is stopped. But no suc h attempt is being made in the area of the other means available to him and there are so many.

When those original Treaty rights were grants, we did not have four-wheel drive vehicles that could cross the terrain virtu ally 365 days of the year. We certainly didn't have airplanes and we didn't have the kind of power that a strong seal beam light can throw through the woods that takes such a heavy toll of our game. I would simply want to in dicate to the Honou rable Min ister that the support of the Legislature would be with him particularly with the opport un e timeliness of a legal backgro und . You have a legal backg round you rself, sir.

You have been a former Attor ney-General of this province and I would encourage you to pick up this challenge. I think any Mini ster, when he assumes the respon sibilities for a department, there are always one or two particu lar subj ects that a particular person, a particular Min ister, is well sui ted to resolving and I'm suggesting, Mr. Min ister, that you are that person in deed at this particular time. I'm even forgetting, Mr.

Chairman, your rather gen erous comments about the cattlemen of the province some years ago when we entered into an other debate and we were worried about rus tling and you sug gested that, well, perhaps, in a lenient way the first one should be on the house. -(ln terjection)- That's yesteryear, Mr. Mini ster. We're now dealing with Her Majesty's deer and wildlife which we as a province have und ertaken to all our people, but specifically by treaty to the Native people, to so man age that they will always be there in plentiful supply. I think that's the constitutional item that's always bothered me.

We have in those same Treaties that were signed when the resources were trans ferred to the province in 1930, 1932, we und ertook to so man age the resources that we will always guarant ee a plentiful sup ply for our Indian brothers to avail them selves of for the need of food and for the fu rtherance of their way of life. Mr. Chairma n, we may not neces sarily be able to hold up to that obligation unless we address ou rselves to how game is being hunt ed in this province. I think we can separate the two.

I think we need not attempt to tackle as some may well want to do from time to time and say, why should one group in our society have special rights with respect to game than others. Let's not try to rewrite the Constitution; we know how long constitution-making takes in this cou ntry. I'm not suggesting that we get into that game, but there seems to me to be an opport uni ty particularly one with a legal mind suc h as you have, Mr.

Min ister, to look at those sections of The Resource Transfer Act and to come up with a resolution or possible changes to the Act that could ackn owledge the very serious problems that these methods of hunt ing are causing and really making it very difficult for 753 the departm ent to get the kind of respect and sup port from all of society if there are things going on in our woods that simply breed contempt for the law. Mr. Chairma n, I don't like living with reports that an immediate neighbour of mine man ages to take 80 white-tailed deer out in one season and he does it legally.

Ind eed if one of your officers or if the depart ment tried to stop him, he's liable to press a charge against you for harassment and that's just nons ense. That can't be allowed to carry on. So, Mr. Min ister, I leave you with those thou ghts. One final que stion on a specific item, last year dur ing the wild rice harvest there were a num ber of mechanical harvesters seized by the department, impou nded I believe for a period of time to kind of ride out a situation that had all the potential of some pretty serious con flict. What was the disposition of those seized mechani cal harvesters?

Were prosec utions laid; were they just held or were they released after the greater part of the harvest? MR. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I'll go from the last item and work backwards.

In respect to the matter of the wild rice problem and the mechanical equipment that was in volved, I don't care to comment too much on that because I think the matter is still with the Attorney-Gen eral's Departme nt and I'll leave it at that In respect to the generality of the honou rable member's comments, this enforcem ent of wildlife regulations is an area where tact and diplomacy is requ ired particularly is this so in co nn ection with the alleged offences committed by Native people.

I say alleged because Native people have much broader rights in respect to wildlife harvesting than do anyone else and that is by Treaty. The Federal Government is the government that is the only jurisdiction that can in any way effect any change in those historic laws that were granted to our Native people, but let me say that it's my un dersta nding, not recent un derstanding, but long und erstanding, that it is not Native people only who are in volved in jackligh ting. The honour able member referred to un lawful taki ng of domestic ani mals, namely livestock. I was not heartened, but dismayed to note, Mr.

Chairman, that no twith stand ing my departure as Attorney-General, the succeed ing Attorney-General and then the Attorney-General of the previous admini stration was plagued with the same problems. As a matter of fact I think the num bers of ani mals that were taken unl awfully in creased in num ber rather than decreased in num ber. I've never adopted the philosophy that the honour able member suggested.

He coined that in the House and used it ad nauseum - one for the road Al, or whatever it was -(In terjectio n)- it seemed to work well with him; he had a lot of fun out of it and I encourage him to cont inue to use it if he thinks it's worth an ything -(Interjection)- No, I think it was some other factor, Mr. Chairma n. But in respect to that whole area, I'm advised by staff that the nu m ber of prosec utions - I hope the honou rable member having come in late will not expect me to repeat everything I've said.

The num ber of prosecutions in respect to night hunt ing are up sub stan tially so there has been much more effective activity on the part of the department. The three prairie provinces, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Mani -

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 toba, have through officials been holding discussions in respect to how to address this problem. But. I don't want to repeat everything I've said on previous occa sions before this committee, because it seems like we have been here and some of these things seem like they're old news now to me.

But the ap proach that the department has been taking has been dialogued with specific groups and there has been very effective consultation and dis cussion with Native In dian people at the band level and that is most helpful because there is a growing understanding that this resource, so important to the Native people themselves, can be jeopardized by wanton hunting practices. I think that dialogue that has been initiated will be continued and I' m hopeful that will be very effective and helpful in preserving our wildlife resources. MR. CHAIRMAN: 12. (a)

(1) Salaries for Robli n-Russell. the Member MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE (Ro blin-R ussell): Mr. Chairman, just further to the comments of the Hon ourable Minister, the matter has been widely dis cussed in my jurisdiction, of course the Duck Moun tains in the Riding Mountain Provincial Park is part of the constituency and a lot of dialogue and meeting by various game and fish groups has taken place. In fact the concerns have escalated to such a level that Rob lin now has formed a new game and fish association within the last 30 days.

It's a new one and it likely came through the influence of Joe Robe rtson who is well known all around this room and has taken a very active role in the matters that are before the committee. I'm wondering, the Minister referred to ongoing discussions that are taking place with other jurisdic tions and some of the problems that come to light in the area that I represent, of course, are people that come from out-of-province, from Saskatchewan, that come in and violate the hunting regulations of our province, and I' m wondering, is his staff, or who is to carry on?

Should the people at the local level escalate these discussions with other jurisdictions or other groups to try and bring the matter to, or should it be left to the staff and in his department to carry on these ongoing meetings that are taking place? MR. MACKLI NG: Mr. Chairman, the honourable member refers to an area where there is cross-border involvement and our staff person. Mr.

Robertson, has been working with the local game and fish association there and communications are through him to our sister jurisdiction. their wildlife officers. and progress is being made there in useful dialogue in respect to those probl ems. MR. McKENZIE: Now, the other question that I was asked to raise of the Minister, if he feels that there are changes necessary in the regulations or the legisla tion, or is the present legislation adequate to meet this challenge? MR. MACKLI NG: Mr. Chairman. I think it's premature for me to go into that at any length at this stage. MR. OR CHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Might it 754 be in order to discuss fire supp ression? MR. MACKLING: Sure. MR. OR CHARD: Thank you.

We had some prelimi nary discussion on this the other night and it's my understanding that the arrangement has been for at least the last several years that the government Air Division, under the Department of Highways and Transportation. provides the aircraft for the use of Natural Resources Department in their fire sup pres sion efforts and that the Department of Highways and Transp ortation through the Air Division provides the staffing comp lements in terms of pilots, maintenance crews and provides additional aircraft on lease and I' d just like to ask the Minister if that arrangement will be altered or will it continue in conjunction with Air Divi sion in the Dep artment of Highways and Transportation?

MR. MACKLI NG: Mr. Chairman. in respect to the ob servation the honourable member made, he's quite correct in respect to the development and the tech niques for shared services or shared facilities with other jurisdictions and there's no substantial change in procedure.

There are some specific improvements that are being made in this section: the helitac bases are increased from two to three in 1982; they were two in 1981 and there are going to be three, or were, I'm sorry, this year; in Bissett, Wekusko and Paint Lake - Paint Lake being the new one; expanded capab ility at each helitac base - there will be four crews at each base instead of three and there will be helicopter support for servicing; there is acquisition of four lightning strike equipment installations at Thompson.

Island Lake, Grand Rapids and Hodgson; expanded the number of firetac crews by six at Cormorant, Cranberry Portage, Nopo ming Park. Hadashville, Grand Rapids and Split Lake; improved equipment, the addition of a third CL-215 water bomber and vehi cles for firetac crews. We are getting five more vehi cles here. appa rently. We are in the Prevention

Section adding fire rangers at Swan River, Ashern, Lac du Bonnet, Steinbach. for preventative work. In the last fire period we lost 190,000 hectares by man-caused fires and spent $1.9 million to suppr ess those fires. There's a special effort being made to reduce the number of man-caused fires this year. There's an addition of $4. 5 million for the strategic appr oach to fire sup pression and the emphasis on early detection of the fire and then fast attack of that fire. MR. ORCHARD: Thank you. I thank the Minister for that information.

The subject of the CL-215 water bombers came up the other night in the Member for lnkster's dissertation. I think the Minister will find that both the Air Division Department and his staff will agree that's probably the most effective aircraft in fighting forest fires that is available in the world. The Member for lnkster indicated that possibly efforts should be made to put those aircraft in service in the off-season, say from app roximately September or October through till March or mid-April.

I'd like to tell the Minister that he will, no doubt. find his department as well as particularly the Air Division pursuing that

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 actively as they have been for about two years now. During my exposure with Air Division we had an opportunity to lease one of our water bombers to Argentina. Now we were hesitant at that time to undertake that lease arrangement because we felt there weren't the kinds of guarantees that we needed in place to undertake that lease two years ago. I believe it was in the spring of '79, the high fire year I believe that was '79, was it not? 1979 was the spring of the forest fires? -(Interjection)- '79 was the year when we had all the forest fires, or was it '80? - (Interjection) ---'80, okay.

It was coming into that spring that our aircraft may well have been in Argen tina, and it was a stroke of good fortune that we couldn't make a deal on that; there's always that cau tion in leasing that kind of equipment out. I know that the department has been criticized and the government has been criticized for having that kind of a major investment sit idly by all winter, but we pursued an arrangement with Australia the next year.

We almost had one arranged with one of the states in Australia to have one of our CL-215s go down there but once again the arrangements, although they were quite favourable, did fall through at the behest of the Australian Government. But I'd like to indicate to the Minister that in 1980 when the threat of fires was very very high, we had a great deal of difficulty mustering enough aircraft to fight those forest fires. I think his department will indicate that and Air Division went through all the hoops to try to get aircraft.

It was very very fortunate that I was able to arrange that spring the purchase of the second 215. It was on a conditional sales contract, I believe, to the Yukon Territories. Canada Air - I believe, we have a good working relationship with Canada Air on the CL-215s. They were able to advance the breaking of that condi tional sales contract -I guess would be the best way to put it - and we were able to purchase that on very very short notice and it was the only aircraft available.

Quebec had a fleet of 15 that they did not want to send out of the province because the unique problem with the forest fires is that they tend to be not only a regional problem, but often a national problem, and when they are you just cannot get aircraft from other jurisdictions. So, in that regard we then exercised a purchase option for a third aircraft and in exercising that option we did attain for a Winnipeg aerospace firm an offset to manufacture components for the next series of 215s.

It was a good offset from our stand point for our aerospace industry in Manitoba, and it also was a good acquisition that the Minister will have at his department's disposal this spring, because I believe the anticipated delivery date is some time in April of this year. You know, I would like close this by just by asking the Minister if he would think that three of these heavy water bombers CL-215s are sufficient at the present time or is he entertaining the purchase of additional 215s? MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, I think that with the addition of that aircraft that we'll probably be in a reasonably good position. With the longstanding arrangements that exist with other jurisdictions, I'm hopeful that we'll be able to deal with any problems on that basis. 755 In respect to the leasing out of equipment, I think that has to be carefully monitored to determine that we're not getting a short-term gain and then involved in a very substantial wear and tear on the equipment that really isn't worth it.

We have to look at that very very carefully, although it looks very attractive to get some immediate revenue while they are sitting around, so to speak. The upgrading of equipment can take place in that downtime and I think we'd have to look at that very carefully before we make a decision to rent out extensively. MR. ORC HARD: Mr. Chairman, I certainly agree and that very revenue versus future expense on mainte nance was the reason why we did n't carry out the deal with Argentina.

However, the arrangement we did make with Australia was the last I had anything to do with it - very attractive and might be worth pursuing by the Minister if he would so desire. I am pleased, Mr. Chairman, that the Minister feels the acquisition of two additional water bombers by the previous Con servative government will provide adequate forest fire protection. I'm glad to say that we provided that kind of long-term protection for Manitoba's forest industry. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hour is 4:30, I am interrupting proceedings for Private Members' Hour. We will rec onvene again at 8 o'clock. MR. ENN S: Mr.

Chairman, prior to adjourning the committee, is there any disposition on the part of the Minister to pass out any more detailed information with respect to Capital programs? MR. MACKLING: No problem, I have it here. I thought that we would do that at a convenient time. We got through this item, but ... MR. DRIEDGER: I think maybe if we could have it now, I think it would escalate things if we could get them. MR. MACKLING: Sure, I have no problem with it. I thought we would be through this item earlier and I would have given you the material before we broke, but if you want it now.

I was rather waiting because when the honourable member was here there were only a couple of members present, and we would have been putting it out without sufficient members being here. If you want to take it now, we can provide it now SUPPl Y -NORTHERN AFFAIRS MR. CHAIRMAN, Jerry T. Storie (Flin Flon): Commit tee will come to order. We're continuing with No. 5, Environmental Man agement, Resolution No. 118. 5. (a)

(1) Salaries. The Honourable Minister. MR. COWAN: Mr. Chairperson, I'd like to address these remarks through you specifically to the Opposi tion critic in respect to the Environmental Manage ment Division. As he knows, there has in the past been an environmental accident report tabled in the House which outlines the environmental accidents over the

Tuesday, 23 March, 1982 past year, and there's also been a

section of different departmental annual reports which, in fact, have part of them addressed to Environmental Management Division. This year because of the time constraints, I've not had an opportunity to officially table those two documents, but with the leave of the House or the leave of the Committee I guess, at this juncture, I would ask him if he would want me to informally send him over one copy of each so that he can use them in the development of his questions respecting the Environmental Management Division.

If he suggests and the Committee agrees that's a proper procedure, I'd be glad to send him over a copy of each of those two reports. The other option, of course, is to allow the normal course of actions to unfold and we would table them within a short period of time.

However, there's no statutory requirement to table the environmental accident report, so I couldn't indicate when we would have it tabled, but I'd like to facilitate as much as possible his search for information which he feels is of benefit to him as a member of the Opposition and therefore would like to strike this informal agreement with the permission of the House to encourage those comments. I would ask him for his comments on that. MR. CHAIRM AN: The Member for Tuxedo. MR. FILMON: Mr. Chairman, I thank the Minister for making that offer.

Obviously any information he would like to share with this side of the House will be of benefit to us in formulating our questions and debate on the review of his Estimates, so certainly that would be appreciated if he's prepared to do that now or at some later date, that would be just fine. MR. COWAN: I think what we will do then, Mr. Chair person, is send the two documents over to him now in an informal way and I hope that they are of value to him and his colleagues in their questioning.

As well, the Member for Tuxedo asked for some further information on the new testing sites and the existing testing sites for acid precipitation. I under stand that we have a map prepared and I am prepared to send him over a copy of that map at this time. MR. FILMON: I thank the Minister for giving us that information. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Emerson MR. ALBERT DRIED GER (Emerson): I appreciate the opportunity to be able to enter into the debate on the Estimates here in this department. It is sometimes a little difficult trying to get up and down between the two.

The Minister was more capable of doing that at the time when he was a member of the Opposition than possibly myself. However, I'd like to take this opportunity under the Environmental Management, this

section here to bring up certain concerns. I raised the question about that animal removal during the question period some time back and certain limitations of expressing one's total thoughts at that time and gathering all the infor mation that one would like, so I'd like to take this opportunity to bring that issue to the surface again 756 and maybe ask some questions of the Minister regard ing his position

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-19a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 19a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	50a62aff81792e13637fc28652b6dcdd095c65c5

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