Manitoba Hansard — 24 February 1981 (Sitting 25A, 31st Legislature, 5th Session)

31-5-25a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham (Birtle Russell): Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Member for Virden. MR. MORRIS McGREGOR: I beg to present the third report of the Standing Committee on Economic Development. MR.

CLERK, Jack Reeves: The Stan ding Committee on Economic Development beg leave to present the following as their report: Your Committee met on Tuesday, February 24, 198 1, to consider the Annual Reports of Channel Area Loggers Ltd., and Moose Lake Loggers Ltd. Mr. John Chris tensen, President and Chairman, and Mr. R. J. Kivisto, General Manager of Channel Area Loggers Ltd. and Moo.se Lake Loggers Ltd., provi ded such information as was required by members of the Committee with respect to the Com panies.

The Annual Statements of Channel Area Loggers Ltd. and Moose Lake Loggers Ltd ., for the year ending March 31s t, 1980, were adopted. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Me mber for Virden. MR. McGREGOR: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Dauphin, that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. McGREGOR: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, dir ects me to report the same and asks leave to sit again.

I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Sp ringfield, that the report of Committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. L.R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Commun ity Services and Corrections, I wish to table the annual joint report of the Department of Health and the Department of Community Services and Corrections for the year 1980. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. KEN MacMASTER (Thompson): Mr .

Speaker, I would like to table the 1980 annual report of the Ma nitoba Labou r-Mana gement Review Committee. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR. ARNOLD BROWN introduced Bill No. 31,

An Act to amend

An Act to Incorporate The Men nonite Collegia te Institute. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. SPEAKER: At this time I would like to dra w the honourable members' attention to the lodge on my left, wher e we have a former mem ber of this Assem bly, Mr. Russ Paulley. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Leader of the Opposition MR. HOWARD PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr .

Spea ker, further to the questions that I posed to the Minister of Education yesterday, I would like to, this afternoon, ask the Minister of Finance whether in view of the material that was prepared by the Federal Social Ministry pertai ning to cost sharing post-secondary education, demons trat ing that the Federal share of post-se conda ry educ ation in Manitoba has risen to 70 percent while the Provincial share has decreased to under 15 percent, if the Minister can advise this Chamber whether he is preparing analysis similar to that already prepared by the Federal Government pert aining to the distribution of costs involving Federal- Provi ncial and other means of financing post-secondary education?

MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member of Finance. HON. BRIAN RANSOM (Souris-Killarne y): Mr . Speaker, First of all let me say that we can only assu me that the information table d by the honourable member yesterday is what he says it is - leaked documents being what they are, I think there's some question of that. However, assuming that it is accurate then I have to say that it is a grossly misleading analysis of the situation that exists and it is brought to you by the same people that brought the health scare in the election of 1969, and we will be preparing an analysis, Mr.

Speaker, but we will not be making statements on the basis of erroneous and mislead ing information and I would urge the Leader of the Opposition not to play into the Federal Government hands but to be certain of the information that he is using. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, lt seems to me when we discussed playing into the Federal Government's hands, that this Provincial Government has alr eady 1047

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 played into the hands of the Federal Government in this particular area. Mr.

Sp eaker, then I fur ther ask by way of supple mentary to the Mini ster, further to the question posed to the Minister of Educa tion, whether this Government intends in its negotiations which are on the verge of taking pla ce with the Federal Government pertai ning to this critical area of post secondary financing, cost shari ng, whether the Provincial Go vernment is going to at least demonstrate some cre dibility in view of the said record, not just by way of that particular document tabled, but by other informa tion that we have referred to earlier, going to es tabl ish a target percentage as to the provincial cost-sharing of post secondary education in the Province of Manitoba, whether it be 20 percent, 25 percent, 30?

Is the Provincial Government going to establish some target in order to give itself some credi bility which, Mr. Speaker, the Pr ovincial Go vernment unfortunately has been losing rapidly in the last year or two in respect to this field? MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition seems to have a penchant for using not only inaccurate informa tion, he also has a very short memory because he should be aware, as much or more than anyone else on that side, that the funding arrangements that are now in pl ace with the Federal Government deal ing with post-secondary education, health care and other areas, are those funding arrangem ents that were negotiated when the Honourable Leader of the Opposition was a member of the Sch reyer Go vern ment. The actions, Mr .

Speaker, that our government is taking are entirely and totally consistent with the intent of those funding arrangements. The information which the honourable member is using is information publis hed in the Globe and Mail, information publis hed by a group of university people, all based on information leaked by the Federal Government in an effort to establish an .erroneous cases that is analagous to the health 'funding case, and I urge the honourable member not to fall into that trap. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, when we deal with negotiations in the agreement under way, Mr.

Speaker, what we are talking about is welching on the part of this government, in spirit, pertai ning to those arrangements. Does the Minister indeed, by his statements just announced, deny that the Federal Government is now picking up the bulk of those costs as opposed to only 50 percent of those costs some three years ago? MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I stated earlier, and I state again, that the information in the document tabled by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition yesterday is a grossly misleading distortion of the funding picture. Let me give you one example, Mr. Speaker.

There are tax points included in the 54 percent level of Provi ncia l income tax that the Federal Government claims credit for as federal financing. Now, tell me, Mr. Speaker, if tax points includ ed in our Provincial Government's level of taxation should be cla imed by the Federal Governm ent as their contribution, points that come off of our level of taxation, from our taxpayers in Manitoba, to fund our educational programs, and the Federal Government is trying to tell us that's their contribution. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I am amazed.

I am sure the Mi nister of Muni ci pal Affairs must be squirming in his seat because what the Minister of Finance is sugges ting is what the Mi nis try of Municipal Affairs in Manitoba is doing vis-a-vis the municipalities, and has been for the last five years. A question to the Minister of Finance, further by way of a supple mentary: Will the Min ister acknowledge that the Federal Government yielded tax points to the Province of Manitoba for the specific pu rpose of financing post-secon dary education? MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition demonstrates an amazing ability to distort the situation that exists. He talked about tax points going to the municipalities. We include that in the level of provincial taxation and we turn around and give it to the municipalities. We don't try and say that the municipalities are levying that tax directly on the people and that we are going to take credit for it. We include it as part of our taxation picture, just as the money that is going to fund post-secondary education is part of our taxation picture and not part of the federal taxation picture.

If they want to up their tax level, we'll reduce ours by three or four points, whatever the figure might be. We'll come in with a provincial level of taxation substantially below what it is now and then we 'll let the Federal Government talk about how much money they want to contribute. MR. PAWLEY: lt appears increa singly difficult to obtain any information from the Minister, increasingly difficult, and of course, Mr. Speaker, this is not unusual.

Again, to the Minister: Is the Minister denying, and I can't force the Minister to answer, denying that the Federal Government share, by way of yielding tax points, has indeed resulted in more and more share of the costs of post-secondary education being assumed by the Federal Government and less and less of the costs of pos t-secondary education being picked up at the provincial level? Would the Minister please favor us with a specific response? MR. RANSOM: Mr .

Sp eaker, the Min ister of Education and I have both said that we will be providing a detailed analysis, but contrary to the Leader of the Opposition, to the habit expressed by the Leader of the Opposition, we prefer to deal on facts and not get caught up with things like the Well's Land and Cattle Company allegation. We will deal with facts, Mr. Speaker.

We will demonstrate the position; we will demonstrate that what this government did, and what those members did when they were in government, is entir ely consistent with the funding mechanism worked out with the Federal Government, because the Federal Government was concerned, Mr. Speaker, that when they were matching expenditures on a doll ar-for dollar basis, that their expenditures were going to rise beyond what they were prepared to do. They entered into an agreement with the Sch reyer Government which was going to help the Federal 1048

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 Government put a cap on their expenditures and encourage the province to be more careful with their expenditure of funds. Mr . Speaker, whatever pattern was established, was esta blishe d during the fi rst year of the agreement when those members opposite were in government.

What is being done is entirely and totally consistent with the agreement at the time and the effort which is now being put forward by the Federal Go vernment is analogis e to Be gin's campaign to demonstr ate that the provinces were diverting funds from health care into highways, which Judge Howell showed to be erroneous. The same kind of campaign is now being started to justify the Federal Government withdrawal from the area of post secondary education. Mr. Speaker, we do not intend to fall into that trap again and I urge the Honourable Leader of the Opposition not to fall into it. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to address a question to the Honourable the Minister of Economic Development with respect to the industrial development progress in the province during the past year, that is, during the year 1980. The Ho nour able Mini ster made reference to various manufac turing projects and manufact uring investment that was to occur in 19 80.

Can the Minister now advise the House of any concrete evidenc e showing that the indu strial sector in Manitoba has shown some signs of growth in the past year, that is, during the year 1980. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mini ster of Economic Development. HON. J. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Creek): Mr. Speaker, I think it's a well known fact that the industrial investment as far as expansion and new facilities in the Province of Manitoba in 1980 was up 29.8 accord ing to Statistics Canada over 1979. MR. EVANS: I thank the Mi nister for that information, but I'd like to ask him a supple mentary, Mr.

Speaker, and ask the Minis ter how does he account for the fact that Statistics Canada has now reported that industrial project construction in the Province of Manitoba has declined from $24.2 million in 1979 to $2 1. 8 million in 1980. That is the first 11 months of these years; that is a decline of 9. 7 percent. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker -(I nterjection) MR. SPEAKER: Order, order please. Order please. If honourable members would addr ess their remarks to the Chair, I'm sure we would not have the difficulties. The Honourable Minister. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Sp eaker, the Hon ourable Member for Brandon East still doesn't like anything that is a plus. We were over last year; in 1979 we were over 1978 and the total of the three years, since 1977 through to the end of 1980, we were up to something like 72 percent in industrial investment as far as expa nsion and new investment is concerned. The honourable member doesn't like it if it's a plus, and we have been ahead of each year. We were ahead of 1977, in 1979 we were ahead of 1978, and in 1980 we didn't get quite the same but we have had a plus every year. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, a supple mentary then.

Perhaps the Premier would like to answer this in view of his interjec tions, if not, the Minister of Economic Development. How can he explain then, talking in terms of these sta tistics related to industrial construction in the Province of Manitoba, how can he explain why this good country of ours, Canada, is up 23.6 percent and every other province in Canada other than New Brunswick is also on the positive side? How can he explain why only Manitoba apart from New Bru nswick has shown a sharp decline in industrial project construction in the year 1980? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Speaker, I'll have to take a look at the figur es that he's ref erring to. I'm not familiar with the ones he's referring to. The member picks out figur es sometime in the morning and comes running in here at noon and quotes them. I don't intend to comment on th ose figur es until I've read them. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Emerson. MR. ALBERT DRIEDGER: I have a question to the Fir st Min ister. Yesterday the Leader of the Opposition in his press conference ind icated the position that he took on the Constitution, was his personal position, not necessarily that of his caucus.

Could the First Minister indicate that the position that he's taking on the Constitution is his personal position or that of his caucus? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. STERLING R. LYON (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I'm not only happy but I am proud to be able to say that when I stand in this House or before any pla tform in Canada or in the United Kingdom and talk about the position of the Government of Manitoba, I am talking about the position of the caucus, unlike my honourable friends opposite who have 23 different positions it seems on every topic. MR.

DRIEDGER: A supple mentary question to either the First Minister or to the Attorney-General, has at any stage of the game, the caucus, or the party opposite given their position on the constitutional matter? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. GERALD W. J. MERCIER (Osborne): I think, Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. MR. SPEAKER: Orde r pl ease. The Ho nourable Attorney-General. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for The Pas. 1049

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 MR. RONALD McBRYDE: Mr . Sp eaker, in the absence of the Minister of Resources I would like to add ress a ques tion to the Acting Min ister of Resources who I assume would be the immedia te past Minister of Resources. I wonder if the Minister could indicate in light of the information of a large fish kill near The Pas, Manitoba, at the Birch River Dam, managed by Ducks Unli mited , whether the Department of Resources will be doing a full investigation of this disastrous incident with regard to the northern fishery? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Minister of Finance. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Sp eaker, our department doesn't normally conduct investigations in another province. I could draw to the honourable member's attention that this particular problem happens to be in Saskatchewan. I can tell him that apparently it is not a problem of the magnit ude that has been reported, that rather than some 10,000 fish, it is probably closer to between 100 and 500. MR. McBRYDE: Mr.

Speaker, in light of the fact that this dam controls water right on the border of Manitoba and that a large fish kill in that area affects the fishing on the Saskatchewan River at The Pas, Manitoba, where there is a commercial fishery that has been restricted, where the quotas have not been increased because of the limited supply, the lim ited stock of commercial fish available, I wonder if the Manitoba Department of Resources will be trying to find out what happened and what went wrong, so that they can assist the fishermen in the The Pas area to ensure that there is an adequate supply of fishing for Northern Manitoba.

MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, certainly the staff of the Department of Natural Resources are concerned about anything that affects the resource in Manitoba. I would be happy to correct the misi nterpr etation, or misinf ormation that the honourable member has about this situation. lt is my understa nding that the fish that have been killed in this case are pike; the fishery to which the honourable member refers on the Saskatchewan River is basical ly a pic keral fishery.

The reason that this sort of thing takes place is that the fish leave the Saskatchewan River and some of the larger rivers to go up into the smaller ones to spawn each year, and the fingerlings then return down the river into the Saskatchewan. Some of the adult fish remain up the smaller streams, and this is not an unsual thing at all, it is the sort of thing that occurs rather frequ ently and it is unlikely to have any impact on the problem that the honourable member refers to as existing in the Saskatchewan at The Pas. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for The Pas with a final supplementary. MR. McBRYDE: Mr.

Speaker, the op1mons of the Minis ter just expressed , do not match with the opinions of the fishermen at The Pas, Manitoba, who feel they will be affected by this situation because this is a spawn ing area for fish from the Saskatchewan River. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, with this fur ther example of problems with Ducks Unlimi ted's control of wildl ife habitat in wildl ife areas in Northern Manitoba, I wonder whether or not the Government of Manitoba will now be more cautious and less quickly enter into long term agreements with Ducks Unlim ited, noting the fact that the present Premier was an active board member of this organization. I wonder if now the province will be a little more cautious and a little bit more consider ate of the interests of the people in Northern Manitoba before they rush into agreements with Ducks Unli mited.

MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what kind of comments the honourable member is making, whether he is trying to cast aspersions upon the First Minister for having served on the board of such a fine dedicated organization as Ducks Unlimited, and he is accusing us of rushing into agreements. I can assure the honourable member that any agreements that this government has ever entered into with Ducks Unli mited have been agreements to carry out projects that this government wished to see carried out.

Ducks Unli mited, in the area of the member's constituency have done extensive work to maintain wildli fe habitat there, which is in the interests of many of the honourable member's constituents. I would be happy to know what his position is. He has remained strangely silent over the past months with respect to the maintenance of the Saskram area and I would be pleased to know what his position is. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MS. JUNE WESTBURY: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Honourable Minister of Community Services.

On February 3, I asked the Minister some questions about alleged misuse of funds by the Manitoba Indian Brotherhood and he pointed out that he was satisfied that the Brotherhood had received $1 30,000 from the province and had paid out at least that much for rent and office expenses. Mr . Speaker, in light of the fact that both federal and provincial contributions to the Brotherhood went into the same account, the same pot, has he investigated the budgeting and expenditure practices of the MIB?

I want to empha size that I am not asking about the Four Nations Confederacy, which I understand is properly handling its accounts. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Community Services. HON. GEORGE MINAKER (St.James): Mr. Speaker, I have written to the Provincial Auditor and requested that he seek copies of the audit that is being done by the Federal Government and to advise me of any wrongdoings or rightdoings in the matter. I am sure that if there is anything wrong, that I will work with the Attorney-General to make sure that proper steps are taken. MS.

WESTBURY: On the same day, the Minister ind icated he was satisfied that the provincial contribution to the MIB's core admin istration were properly accounted for because of an audit report showing office expenses in excess of $40,000 a year. In view of the fact that the former fina ncial 1050

Tuesday,24 February, 1981 comptroller has said that money al located for office expenses was improperly diverted under the guise of payi ng for research st udies which were neither commissioned nor prepared, is the Minister also having these statements investigated for possible fraud? MR. MINAK ER: Mr. Speaker, my comments related to the audited statement that referred to the 19 79-80 operation of the MIB. At that time it was audited and was lis ted as being used for the areas of expenses that we had given the moneys for. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge with a final supple mentary. MS.

WESTBURY: Mr. Speaker, would the Minister indicate whether he is having the statements to the effect that mone y was im pro perly diverted for research studies which were neither commissioned nor rece ived, is he having that statement investigated, Mr. Speaker? Would he be kind enough to inform the House? MR. MIN AKER: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier to The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge, we had requested that the audited statement that is being carried out, I unde rst and, by the Federal Government, that we would receive copies of same.

The Provincial Auditor, I understand, has requested those copies, and they will be investigated at that time when they are received. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for Churchill. MR. JAY COWAN: Yesterday the Minister of Labour indicated that an interim permit would be given to an appropriate air carrier in order to con tinue the service into northern communiti es which previously had been served by Lambair, so that that would be continued with the least possible disruption.

Can the Minister now indicate if that permit has indeed been issued and if in fact it has, can he indicate which carrier, or which carriers, are the recipient of that permit? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Speaker, there has been a very temporary interim licence issued to L-Air of Thompson, the expiry date being Friday noon. I think this may possibly have been dealt with on a more permanent basis except there has been a further application for consideration of support of Lamb's come forth, I understand, by the Indian people in Northern Manitoba, a group of them.

Indications are that they wish to partici pate in the opera tion, financially, of Lamb's. The courts I understand are going to deal with that issue tomorrow morning - pardon me, Thursday morning, and if it's upheld I suspect that Lamb's may be back in business. If it's not dealt with by the courts in a manner in which they feel that would carry the company, there's all likelihood, and I'm guessing at their time

schedule that Frida y morning, after deal ing with that application Thursday morning or that presentation Thursda y morning, Friday they will give a permanent licence. The permanent one, I again suspect would last in the neighbourhood of a year, 10 months to a year, until a hearing could be held by the Federal Transport Commission to see who in fact should have the final rights that Lamb's now hold. MR. COWAN: My supp lementary ques tion, Mr.

Speaker, is to the Minister of Northern Affairs, and I would ask the Minister of Northern Affairs if he can inform the House as to what action he has taken as Minister responsible for Northern Affairs to monitor any potential problems which may arise out of the current situation in respect to the air services to communities previously served by Lambair? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Nor thern Affairs. HON. DOUG GOURLAY (Swan River): Mr.

Speaker, I think my colleague the Minister of Labour has answered that to a certain extent and the fact that an interim carrier will be looking after those communit ies that are currently serviced by Lambair, and I under stand that there are only some two or three communities that would be not serviced at all if there was no other carrier issued a permit at this time. But certainly we are concerned about the air service to the northern communities and we'll be watching it very closely. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Churchill with a final supp lementary. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the Minister of Northern Affairs informed us of his great concern in this regard and we don't doubt him, however, what we are asking for is specific actions or programs which he is going to put in pl ace to monitor any changeover or any continuation in order to ens ure that the level of service is being maintained, and that is a very specific question asking for a specific answer in regard to programs or action that he will be taking under his res ponsibility to ensure that service to northern communities is maintained during these difficult times. MR. GOURLAY: Mr.

Speaker, at the present time there are many questions unanswered with respect to the Lambair situation and I think it would be inappropriate for me to make any statements at this time with respect to any su bsequent air transportation that we would be looking to assist at this time. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Memb er for Portage la Prairie. MR. LLOYD G. HYDE: Mr. Speaker, I have a question to dir ect to the Honourable Attorney General.

Could the HOnourable Minister advise the House what progress, if any, was made with these talks held yesterday in Ottawa with the Federal Soli citor General, the Honourable Robert Kaplan, regard ing the RCMP policin g contra ct with the provinces, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, there are two main issues, I think, before the Federal and Provincial Governments, the first relating to accountability of 1051

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 the RCMP to the Provincial Attorney-Generals which is considered to be somewhat of a problem in some other provinces, and the second issue of more imp ortance to Manitoba is the question of cost. On the first issue we were able to consider some drafts submit ted by the provin ces and drafts submitted by the Federal Solicitor General on the question of accountabil ity and officials from the Federal Government and the Provincial Governments will meet next week for two or three days to attempt to put together a sat is factory dra ft to all governments concerned.

On the question of cost, there was no indication from the Federal Solicitor General that he had a better offer to present to the provinces. The officials next week will examine further and evaluate some of the criteria which the Federal Government have used in making their proposal and the question of cost will still have to be further conside red. At the same time the provinces did not indicate that they would back down from our position of avoi ding any other but an inflationary increase. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for St. George. MR. BILLIE URUSKI: Mr .

Sp eaker, I ask this question to the Acting Minister of Natural Resources, since the Minister of Natural Resources is not here today. I ask him with respect to the recent takeover bid of Abitibi by the Thompson Corpora tion in Toronto, and I ask him what actions his government will be undertaking to prevent the spectre that we had in Manitoba of Tribun e by the takeover of Thompson so that the same type of a situation does not arise in terms of a pulp and processing plant paper mill in Manitoba in Pine Falls. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mini ster of Finance. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, I'm afraid that the honourable member is once again mixing facts and drawing a very long bow, but I will take the question as notice for the Minister of Natural Resources. MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask the Minister whether he will be reviewing his ill-founded agreement of give-aways to Abitibi now that there is a likeli hood of Abitibi's control being taken over by Thompson. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, what the members opposite are - seem to be consis tent in their socialist philosophy that what are fair and equitable and competitive agreements to every other form of government in the province always seem to be termed as give-away by our socialist friends. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for St. George with a final suppl ementary. MR. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask the Minister whether a reduction of some $6.00 per cord in cutting fees is not a give-away to the corporation of Abitibi. MR. RANSOM : Not when the first $6.00 was extracted under the thr eat of expropriation, Mr.

Speaker, and not when the alleged $6.00 reduction means that corporate citizen of Manitoba is paying the same rate as anyone else in this province has paid for the use of the resource. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Memb er for Rossmere. MR. VIC SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I'm just wondering who owns the resources referred to, but I have a question to the Minister of Mines.

In view of the fact that every lease agreement entered into by previous governments in this province, successive governments, ND P, Con servative and Liberal, have been public information, dealing with potash, when can we expect the one that you people entered into last year, the so-called letter of intent to be tabled? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Energy. HON. DONALD W. CRAIK (Riel): Mr. Speaker, I have answered that question a number of times last year for the members of the Legislature. If and when an agreement is signed with regards to potash, all the details of it will be made available. MR.

SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, a supple mentary. Does that letter of intent have an expir y date after which if ther e is no fur ther agreement the min erals and the leasehold totally reverts to the province without any right by IMC as against the province with respect to those minerals, and what is that date if there is one? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, the understanding with IMC was for a 12 -month period which expires about the end of April. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Rossmere with a final supplementary. MR. SCHROEDER: Could the Minister answer the last part of that ques tion.

If there's no further agreement by the end of April does IMC have no rights with respect to the Crown lands in Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Energy. MR. CRAIK: Mr . Speaker, I believe the member said Crown lands. Is that correct? Or did he . . . ? MR. LYON: No he didn't. He doesn't know the difference. MR. SCHROEDER: Well, if I could expand on it. The mi neral rights, the potash rights, which are the subje ct matter of the lease. MR. LYON: He thinks the state owns them all. MR. CRAIK: No, Mr. Speaker, the Crown only owns approximately 50 percent of the mineral rights in that area. MR.

SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Memb er for Dauphin. MR. JIM GALBRAI TH: I have a question for the Minister for Economic Development. I have in my 1052

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 hands here a pamphlet that was put out in the Dauphin area by the Leader of the Opposition and in it it states that a business closed in Gl enella , Manitoba, Glenella Creamery; I would like to ask the Minis ter of Ec onomic Deve lopment when this creamery closed. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister for Economic Development. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, when I was speaking in a Throne Speech debate, I pointed out that that brochure that was put out was inaccurate; that the Glenella Creamery is open and doing business and still is.

I can only say that I'm very surprised that the Leader of the Opposition would allow a pamphlet that has been proven inaccurate to continue to be distributed in this province. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Transcona. MR. WILSON PARASIUK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is directed to the Attorney-General.

On February 12 th, in this Legislature, the Attorney General ind icated to me that following a fatal accident in the CNR reclaim yard three years ago, that he had written the CNR asking them to conduct a search of the reclaim yard to ensure that there weren't any other shelves lying around that lead to that fatal accident. Can the Minister indicate whether he received a reply from the CN indicating that they had indeed complied with the request of the Attorney-General, and is the Minister satisfied that that reclaim yard is now free from any shells which might explode? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I'll take that question as notice and respond tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. George. MR. URUSKI: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I don't know who the Acting Minister of Agriculture - oh, the same the Minister of Finance is the Acting Minis ter of Agriculture.

I wonder if the Minister of Agriculture, the Acting Minister, would indicate when the decision was made for the transfer of personnel in the Department of Agriculture from Winnipeg to Brandon and why it wasn't announced during the Estimates process; whether this was a last minute hairbrained idea of the Conservatives pending an election. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Finance. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, the intent of the move was annou nced in Brandon some time ago; in October, when the Cabinet was on one of our tours keeping in touch with people of the province, we annou nced the intention to do that.

I can only assume, Mr. Speaker, that the research work done by the members opposite was not of sufficient quality to enable them to even raise the question during the Minister of Agriculture's Estimates. MR. SPEAKER: Order, pl ease. The time for question period having expired, we'll proceed with Orders of the Day. The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. MERCIER: I move, se con ded by the Honourable Minister of Finance, 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.

MOTION presented and carried and the Ho use resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Sup ply to be granted to Her Majesty, with the Honourable Member for Virden in the Chair for the Department of Labour; and the Honourable Member for Radisson in the Chair for the Department of Government Sevices. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPL V SUPPL V - LABOUR AND MANPOWER MR. CHAIRMAN, Morris McGregor (Virden): This Committee will come to order. We are on 2.(a)(2) - The Honourable Member for The Pas. MR.

McBRYDE: I wanted to point out to the Minister, in order that he might be able to take some action on it with his colleague, the Mini ster of Highways, that I was recently invited to attend a meeting by the IWA representative from The Pas in terms of safety in the logging industry and I think those meetings were quite worthwhile in terms of getting input from both industry and labour as to what the new regulations should be in the logging industry. One of the problems that came up in terms of safety in logging was the safety of the logging truck drivers as it relates to the situation of the weigh scales.

The situation right now is, I think, that any truck that's overloaded has to change its load around so that they meet the weight restrictions that are on. What happens at The Pas is that the logging trucks drive a considerable distance before they hit the weigh scale. lt could be a long way; it could be from up the Fay Lake Road all the way into The Pas.

If they hit the weigh scale which is two miles from the unloading site at the ManFor operation in The Pas and they're overloaded, what the driver does is climb up on top of his load and try and dislodge some logs and throw them off so that they meet the load restrictions. In light of all the hazardous situations we looked at in going over those regulations, and it seemed like the restrictions could be done with changes in the regulations, and changes that were agreed to by Labour and Management there with the staff of the department, could be brought into effect.

But this one requires some sort of a co-operation and some sort of an arrangement with the Minister of Highways and that's why I'd like to bring it directly to the Minister's attention. This practice seems to be quite a dangerous one because - I suppose there's a couple of things. One is it's fairly hard to judge in the bush the weight that the load is going to have. The second problem is of course that there are truckers and owners and operators that do try and get around the weight restrictions - they do overload and they know they're overloaded and they try and run the scales 1053

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 and operate when the scales aren't operat ing, etc. So that is a problem. What happens now is that if they are caught overloaded the owner of the truck pays for the fine but it's the driver of the truck who has to risk his life to climb up on the load and dislodge the log. My underst anding from the representatives of the Labour Union that has an agreement with Abitibi, in the logging industry for Abitibi, is that when they're hauling tree lengths, the driver of the truck climbs up on the load with a chain-saw and cuts some of the logs off in order to get under the weight rest rictions.

This in their mind, and it seems to me, is one of the most dangerous practices that could be involved, climbing up on a full load with a chain-saw running; one slip and it could be very hazardous, very dangerous. I would like the Minister to be fully aware of that situation and to see if there was some way . . .

I suppose in my mind it would be preferable to increase if it would be possible under the highways regulations, to increase the fine for logging trucks, but allow them to continue to the unl oading ramp if it's nearby so that the load could be unloaded in the normal safe manner that that operation is handled in. I think that's the only way you could get around having them take advantage of any leniency in the transpor tation re gu lations and the highw ays regulations is by making a stiffer fine.

That would also put the onus on the operator and the penalty on the operator rather than on the driver, who is sometimes an emp loyee and sometimes is an owner operator. That is my rec ommendation to the Minister. I was hoping to catch him and the Minister of Highways together sometime to raise this matter with him but I thought I would use this forum since the Minister was here and willing and able to listen. MR. FOX: Last year I raised the question of the fact that in the mechanical

section we were going into more of a flooded system in respect to refrigeration and I suggested that there should be a hard look at it in respect to safety in this area.

I'm just wondering whether The Workp lace Safety Act has had any communications and had any directives in respect to those safety commi ttees that are operating in this area or whether they've had any feedback in respect to this area and if there are any steps being taken to have special equipment for areas that have this kind of hazard and whether there has been any training dir ectives forwarded towards those kind of safety comm ittees so that they could deal with it adequately at the plant level. MR. MacMASTER: The inf ormation I have, Mr.

Chairman, is that there has been no feedback back from the safety commit tees ; I sup pose we were lacking in initiative to go to the safety committees. If the member will leave it with me I'll assure him that our division will go to them now seeing as there's been no feedback of allegedly no problems with them . That do esn 't necessa rily mean that the Member for Kildonan hasn't got a point. I will assure him our people will go to them and see what's going on in that respect. MR. FOX: Mr.

Chairman, I realize that we are going to deal with Worker's Compensation under the Mini ste r's Salary, but whil e we are unde r the Workpla ce Safety Health Department I would like to again get inf ormation and assurances from the Minis ter tha t this Act and The Worker's Compensation Act are being correlated and work together.

I realize that the inspection is being done through the Workpla ce Safety but it follows that since the accidents are reported at The Worker's Comp ensa tio n level and of cou rse if they are because of hazardous conditions or any other conditions then they should be looked at through The Workpla ce Safety Health Act, and again the communication correlation should be going forward and backward between the Safety Comm ittees of the various employment areas that are involved. Can the Minister enl ighten us as to what is taking place in that regard? MR. MacMASTER: I appreciate the point that the member is making.

I'm assured that during the course of the past year there has been a great deal of communications and working relationships been established between ourselves and The Workmers Compensation Board. MR. CHAIRMAN: (2) (a) - the Member for Kildonan. MR. FOX: Can the Minister inform me what official correlation there is? Can he inform us who is responsible to report to who? Which way does it flow? MR. MacMASTER: I understand it is not a person per se. Our staff deals with their staff on an ongoing basis and there is exceptionally good co-operation.

There just hasn't been a problem in them receiving information if they require it from us or us receiving information from them. MR. FOX: I thank the Minister for that information but I was just trying to determine if there was a procedure or is it just left to individuals to make various commun ication with other individuals. I would imagine there should be some kind of a laid out procedure from the department that in certain instances this is done and in certain other instances something else is done.

I know that when there are fatalaties there are inquiries and so on but there must be some procedure laid down that is followed. MR. MacMASTER: The direct official relationship is between the dir ector of our Workp lace Safety Division and Ralph Boyes with the Compensation Board but because that's an official one doesn't mean that there isn't a great deal of communication take place between the other staff. MR. CHAIRMAN: (2)(a) - the Member for Churchill. MR.

COW AN: Last year . . . the Minister indicated that his department would be undertaking a review of the lung function tests and the x-ray tests, I would hope that the Minister would be able to provide us with some inf ormation respect ing the outcome of that review by his department. MR. MacMASTER: Ongoing discussion has taken place as we outlined. I made reference to this the other day and I do not wish to go into details on it at 1054

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 the moment but la bour has expressed some concerns and so has management and our people are appreciative of their concerns. We expect that there will be a new procedure established in the near future. If the Member for Churchill would wish, when that procedure is established for his own edifica tion, I am quite prepared to unofficially or offi cially - whatever he likes - let him know what that new proced ure would be. lt relates pr im arily, Mr . Chairman, to the time of return of the results. That certainly is of concern it appears to me from what I've gathered from all three parties.

MR. COWAN: ... going to discuss it in a bit of detail, perhaps to provide some suggest ions, if possible, or at least to better und erstand the prog ram myself because I, too, have been approached by individuals and organi zations who have suggested that the program is not working to the utmost.

One of the questions that have been given to me time and time again is one respecting the licence which is given by the Department of Labour upon the completion of the x-ray and lung function tests. lt has been the understanding of many that licence was a lic ence that meant that a worker was fit for emp loyment and therefore would not have any abnormalities show up on the x-rays or through the lun g functioning test. Ho wever, I've also been inform ed that is not the case, that li cence just means that the ind ividual has had the test and is not indicative of any of the results of the test.

I would hope the Minister would be able to clarify as to the exact intent of that licence and what it does mean so that when asked these questions in the future we can provide a mor e definitive answer than we've been able to do in the past. MR. MacMASTER: I understand that part of the flaw in the system - if you can call it that, I suppo se that's it - is that so often as in other systems if there's something wrong people are certainly made aware of it; if something is not found to be wrong then in some cases they're not being made aware of the fact that there's no problem.

That seems to be an inadequacy in the entire system which . . . my people brought that to my attention, that has to be cleared up, they should be told officially, yes to all intents and pu rposes you're fine or as well as those who do have a problem. MR. COWAN: What action is taken if an abnormality either radiographic or one arising out of the lung function test is found? Is there a specific waiting period before the individual is informed?

Is the individual called back for more tests or in fact if the abnormality is not one which can be diagnosed easily, is it the procedure to wait until the next year to see if that abnormality has changed or stayed the same? MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, I was trying to clear up when the doctor came into it because I knew the doctor was involved in it one way or the other. When the people go for their tests they're asked to iden tify who their family doctor is. If there's any abnormality to the testing, the doctor is then informed and he then takes over from there. MR.

COW AN: Is the ind ividual informed of the abnormality? MR. MacMASTER: Apparently not. Apparently the individual is not informed, that his doctor is informed and the doctor then informs the individual as to the type of retest ing, send him out, send him in, bring him in, whatever the case is that the doctor then decides what should be done. MR. COWAN: This would appear to be a policy of the department.

I would hope the Minister would be able to provide some insight as to why they have chosen not to inform the individual, and that is in fact what has happened, they have an option to inform the individual, and yet they do not inform the individual and prefer rather to inform the doctor.

I have nothing against informing the doctor, that's a very im portant step in the pr ocess, the family physician, however some individuals do not have family physicians in the minin g industry and that could be a problem, especially in no rthern com mun ities where you have such an extreme rotation of doctors, you could find people missing out on being informed because of that and it would appear to be a simple matter to inform the individual that there was an abnormality and at the same time, say we have also sent a copy of this to such and such a doctor whom you may wish to contact in respect to further information.

Why is it that they are following the process of not bringing the individual in at the earliest possible moment in the suppl ementary question of course because the Minister indicates that they are reviewing this? Is that one of the areas where we might see some action on the government or where the government plans to take some action in the near futur e in respect to inform ing the individual of any abnormality as well as informing the individual of x-rays and lung function tests that do not show any difficult situations or problems? MR. MacMASTER: Yes it is, Mr.

Chairman, one of the areas that we think that we can make work better, I guess you can describe it. I'm not sure if you had to pick one or the other which would be the best procedure; that you inform the emplo yee, the worker, and hope that he sees a doctor or that you report something abnormal to the doctor and trust in his professional ethics that he certainly will get a hold of the worker. Workers, I have been lead to believe, do in fact - it's demanded of them that they name a doctor in their community.

So I think we've covered that and the doctor when he is informed, you cert ainly would like to beli eve that immediately he would contact the worker. I suppose the best meth,od in that precise situation is that both were informed and that covers if the doctor has left, or if the doctor is busy or if the emp loyee doesn't want to bother and at least both sides know about the situation and it's a better system than what we have in place today, I think. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Bob Anderson (Springfield): The Member for Churchill. MR.

COWAN: lt is not a matter of either/or as the Minister said; we don't have to pick one or the other. Often we can include them both together and that appears to be the intention of the government and I commend them on that because that will be an important change in respect to how these results are relayed to the individuals and what they do with 1055

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 them. I just want to point out for the record, one problem with naming a doctor in the community by the individual and that is that doctors go through northern communities where a lot of your mining activity is located, very very quickly and that you could name a doctor and by the time the tests got back there could be two doctors already through the community and that would certainly represent a potential area for problems in the relayance of the information to the individual, so we do have to take that into consideration.

I think if they put in place a system where the indi vidual and the doctor designated by the individual are informed they will have covered all the options and have the best system. When can we expect that sort of change in policy to be implemented? MR. MacMASTER: Wel l, Mr. Chairman, I would have liked to see it implemented before now. The Member for Churchill is aware, I'm sure that it was myself that raised this problem or as I saw something that wasn't quite appropria te I raised that myself approximately a year ago.

The parties have been talked to on both sides of the situation, being the emp loyer and the emplo yee. That's one of the problems that we hope to resolve and I understand that meetings are scheduled or will be be scheduled in the very near future to hopefully clear up a situation that government, of all political stripes, has found very adequate for the last 10, 15, 20 years, whatever the case may be. it's like every other system you have in place; it's fine until it's reviewed enough and it's found that it could operate better and that's really what the review is all about. MR.

COWAN: Does the Minister have with him the information as to the specifics as to how many x-ray and lung function tests were given over the past year and how that relates to the previous year, whether there was an increase or decrease, and if there was a decrease, why that decrease occurred? MR. MacMASTER: it's in the Annual Report, Mr. Chairman, on Page 12. There were 5, 16 0 x-rays and 4,841 function tests given in the previous year. MR. COWAN: That would be an incr ease or a decrease from the year previous? MR. MacMASTER: I un derstand it's a slight decrease in numbers. MR.

COWAN: The next question that would follow of course is the reason behind the decrease in the number of tests that were performed. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Fort Rouge. MS. JUNE WESTBURY: Mr.

Chair, I wanted to ask relative to the Workers Compensation Board and in view of the British Columbia Supreme Court Justice's ruling to the effect that WCB must open its confidential medical files to claimants wishing to challenge the Board's disability ruling, whether there is any change in policy in this province or whether the Minister intends to make a statement on that or what can he tell us relative to the Manitoba position? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Would the Member for Fort Rouge repeat the first part of her question? MS. WESTBURY: Repeat it? Sorry.

The Speaker told me to keep my voice down in the House so I'm trying to keep it down everywhere. B.C. Supr eme Court Justice John Bouck has ruled that the Workers Compensa tion Board must open its confidential medical files to claimants who wish to challenge the Board's disability ruling. I don't have the date; I have the clipping without a date on it. Oh, it looks like February 24, that's today, so that's impossible. This is a report from the Vancouver Gazette. I wondered if the Mini ster intends to make any changes in Manitoba.

I guess he's just not aware of the ruling and perhaps I should him an opportunity to become familiar with the ruling. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, I'm not aware of the ruling but I am aware of the issue that is live in some people's minds. it's not objectionable that those file s be confidential in a lot of peo ple's eyesight but it is in some and I won't get into the degree. The Lampe Commit tee that reviewed the compensation situation in Manitoba, did a lot of things. it was comprised, that committee, as the Member for Fort Rouge may or may not know, of Mr. Art Coulter, Mr. McBain and Mr. Lampe.

That report will be for thcoming in the future. I don't know whether they've dealt with that precise issue but I suggest to the Member for Fort Rouge that issue was cer tainly raised during the course of the hearings that were held throughout the Province of Manitoba along with a good number of other issues as it relates to the whole system. So to precisely answer your question at this moment, I do not have any intention today of giving consideration to that. I certainly have a lot of intentions of giving a lot of consideration to that report when it comes in.

We may find that report deals with that precise issue; I can't tell you what that is. MS. WESTBURY: Just to clarify the situation it was open to claimants, not just open generally - it would be claimants themselves who would be able to see what is in their files and what doctors and WCB staff members have to say about their disabilities. Well, I'll be following that up at some later time. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: (2) - pass - the Member for Churchill. MR.

COWAN: Yes, I'd like to put on the record my thanks to the Minister for his prompt provision of the informational bulletins and the posters that are being distributed by the Workp lace Safety and Health Branch now. He provided those to me last night and I didn't place on the record that had happened and I think it's important that it is on the record. While discussing those I would like to again make my standard request for a mailing list for those bulletins specifically and will try to assist the Minister in providing what other names we may be able to provide to him in respect to that.

I prefer to do it that way because we don't have any set mailing list ourselves that we can give to the Minister to have him add to, so we can just look through them, see what we think may be areas where the mailings can go out, it might be helpful and then give it back to the Minister. I'd also ask the Min ister if those mailings are going to the doctors in the province and the occupational health nurses or to the nursing 1056

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 association so that they can be passed on to nurses who have some interest in occupational health as a specially area. MR. MacMASTER: At the sake, Mr. Chairman, of getting myself in trouble before I've seen the list myself, I can simply say I hope so. Once we've got that list together I intend to forward a copy to the member and I would certainly hope that people interested in occupational health in the Province of Manitoba are on that list. If they're not then the Director of Workpla ce Safety and I will have a little chat about why they're not on the list; it's quite simple. MR.

COWAN: If there any additions that we might be able to make, they should not reflect badly on the dir ector, it's just that we have different perspectives and we approach a problem in different areas and develop contacts that the other people don't necessarily develop. So I think we may be able to assist in that regard, however, I don't want to see that assistance to be taken in any respect as a reflection on the dir ector.

I've found the director in my conversa tions and correspondence with him, asking him for assistance in problems that have been presented to me to be extremely helpful and can only commend his activities in that respect. The Minister indicated during a public speaking engagement, I believe it was last year, perhaps it was the year before, that he was concerned about the lack of expertise among the medical doctors and the medical profession including the academic part of the medical profession in occupational medicine and at that time ind icated that action needed to be taken.

I would ask him what action he has taken in respect to a very prominent need in respect to a lack of knowledge, and there are no kind of words that can be used, a lack of knowledge on the part of many doctors respect ing occupational hazards and occupational diseases and ill nesses. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, doctors are like a lot of other professional people within society who do not always make themselves available of information that's available, do not always get into other areas of medicine if you wish.

What I was saying at that particular seminar was that the doctors sometimes appear to stand back - sometimes I said - even in fact occas ionally cha stis e and critic ize without themselves getting involved with and giving advice where advice could be sought and famil iarizing themselves with the workings of our division. I forget what the issue was, it was one of many that we all involve ourselves in. I had many members of the profession come to me later and say that I was right that they themselv es have not involved themselves to any great degree.

The MMA, Manitoba Medical Associa tion, has expressed some interest and I can't give you specifics over the last year or so in learning what some of the workings that we're doing are, and have volu nteered themselves to sit on committees if we so choose to appoint them to committees. I'm guessing but I think there is a committee someplace along the line that we did in fact take the recommendation from the MMA and appoint one of their people to a committee within government. MR. COWAN: Mr. Chairperson, I'm going to take the argument a step further.

I don't beli eve that it's just a matter of the medical profession not involving themselves fully in offering criticism. I think the matter that they have not given the type of priority that I would like to see and I'm certain the Minister would like to see given to the area of occupational medicine.

I have a number of people come to me from time to time as I'm certain the department does, as I'm certain the Minister does with what they belie ve to be occu pa tionally related medical complaints and we have a hard time finding a doctor in this province who has developed the expertise especially for dealing with some of the more exotic areas to be able to treat them with a certain degree of authority and finality. They just have not been exposed to the whole area of occupational medicine. They do not appear to have taken a great interest in the area of occupational medicine.

I don't think it's necessary to point out that there is very little emphasis pla ced on it during their training and during their eduction, and yet it is an area of growing concern. lt is an area where we have an abominable lack of knowledge and lack of experience and where we need to fill a gap and a growing void and yet it is an area where ther e do es not seem to be a priorization by the medical profession itself.

So the Minister has his work cut out for him in respect to this and that's to try to convince the medical associations of the necessity for priorizing this particular area of concern and putting into pl ace programs at the medical college level that will in fact provide some experience and provide some lessons to new doctors in respect to occupational medicine, but the Minister's task is more than that.

I would throw a suggestion out to the Minister for his comment and hopefully for his action and that is that Manitoba become one of the front runners in respect to occupational medicine in Canada and develop an occupational health clinic. I know the Minister has been approa ched with this concept before and I've been approached with it before and I have to admit when I was first approached with it, it took me quite some time to examine it, to deal with it and to fully understand the signif icance and the ramifications of it.

What finally convinced me was when an individual came to me not too long ago with what that person belie ved to be an occupational disease and we searched around for a doctor that could deal with that and had a great deal of difficulty in finding a doctor who would make the type of examinations and provide the type of treatment which we felt was necessary. That is not an isola ted case. The problem is that too many family physicians don't look first to occupational causes of illness, yet we know that occupational factors do in fact create serious medical problems for workers.

They are not trained to do that and workers don't know where to go when they think there may be an occupational related ill ness. Matter of tact, when they do go to the doctor, and this happens often, not in every case but often, when they do go to a doctor, and they say - I believe that this may be an occupational rel ated dis ease, the doctor is somewhat hesitant to take their advice, to take their suggestion.

And that happens, doctors, and I don't fault them, are locked into their tra ining and lo cked into their own experience and because there has not been a priorization of this problem in the past we find that they' re not thinkin g in that way; they' re not approaching the problem from that perspective. 1057

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 What an occupational health clinic would do would be to set up a clinic and we on this side believe very strongly in that concept, a health clinic that would deal specifically with occupationally related diseases and illne sses. The effects of that would be multifault. Firstly, it would provide a place for workers who suspected occupational ill nesses to go. In other words they wouldn't have to search around from doctor to doctor, to doctor, to doctor, to doctor, trying to get somebody to lis ten to them, and that's what they have to do now.

They have to make that circuit and go around and around and around trying to find somebody who will say yes, I agree with you, this may be an occupationally induced disease but what can I do about it because that's the next step. What do I know about it? And any doctor who wants to go into treatment in that area has to go throug h a vast amount of li terature, medical literature, has to get in touch with other experts in the field. lt is very difficult for a doctor to start to deal with occupational diseases and ill nesses.

So the difficulty is not only that with finding the doctor but once the doctor is found the doctor wants to work with the patient in this respect. The difficulty is now for that doctor to get the proper information.

So, an occupational health centre would provide support services for doctors who want to special ize in the area, very very important and secondly, would provide support services for general practitioners and others experts in the medical community who wish to have access to information to deal with their own patients in respect to occupational diseases. lt would be an expensive program, certainly it would, but I think that it is an area where this type of positive action is long overdue and when looking at it from the perspective of financial commitment I think the Minister would agree that given the great cost of industrial diseases in financial and human terms to the people of this province that it would be an investment, a capital investment, that would be well suited to provide great returns.

So the question to the Minister is if he can provide us with some insight into his own feelings in respect to the development of an occupational health centre in this province and if we can expect any action in the near future in that regard. MR. CHAIRMAN, Morris MacGregor: The Honourable Minister. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, before I get into the commitment of thinking whether an occupational health centre is something that is needed I would like the opportunity to talk to the MMA.

I'd like them to tell me in their minds the numbers of people in their profession in Manitoba who they would deem to be occupational, good occupational health doctors. I don't know whether that number will be 10, 20 or 10 0 or 200.

Maybe it's a matter of working with the MMA and finding out really what they deem to be occupational health doctors, good qual ified people tha t can deal with that type of problem and determ ine the numbers that they think are in place in Manitoba. lt might be some thing very serious, it might be not so serious, but there may be people in that profession that we are not aware of that are very qualified today.

I have taken the point of the lack of people, the knowledgable in that field, allegedly by the Member from Churchill, and I don't wish to dispute whether there is a lack of numbers of people in that area till I determine in a good conversation with officials of the MMA just what they deem to be the num bers that are available in this province that are profes sionally qualified to deal with those type of problems. MR. COWAN: That is a first step but it certainly is not a satisfactory step by itself, let me put that caveat on it.

You will find that there are certain doctors that are in fact familiar with certain aspects of industrial disease such as those doctors who have developed some expertise in respect to lead in this province. And that's just a handful, very very few compared to the number of general practitioners or experts in other areas, and you will find that there are a few who may have developed some expertise to a li mited extent greater or lesser about asbestos another issue that has come up.

But I think that you will find that very few of them will qualify thems elves as ind ustrial health doctors or indus trial health experts, or medical profession who in fact, priorize industrial health and have developed a great deal of expertise in it. So when the Minister talks to the Manitoba Medical Association I think that he will find that is the case and one of my colleagues has passed me a note here with a suggestion on it; I think it is a good suggestion.

Firstly, that he report back later to us on this dis cussion, I would anticipate those dis cussions would take place in the very near future because it is an urgent problem.

And secondly, ask the MMA for a list of doctors whom they believe to be specialists in the different areas of occupational medicine and ask them for permission to make that list public and to do so at that point; to make that list public so that if there is a number out there that is greater than I expect it to be or I allege it to be than at least all the workers in this province will have an opportunity to contact those individuals whom they feel may be able to help them in their specific area.

But I think that the Minister will find that the numbers are lim ited and that the doctors themselves do not consider themselves to be experts in that field for the most part and so I think that there is a problem there. I would hope that the Minister would make those discussions, would have those discussions and then would publi cize it perhaps as an inform ati ona l bulletin as well as a press release that would go out. Perhaps as part of an annual report. There are lots of avenues where the Minister could provide that information to great numbers of people. So I would hope he would take that action.

But he also has to talk to the employers in respect to this. I think he also has to talk to the unions. Now, I have not talked to the employers in respect to this but I have talked to the unions and I have, time and time again, come up with dissatisfaction in respect to access to medical doctors who are expert in the area of occupational medicine.

So taking their advice and taking their concerns I would expect that the Minister will find the same, because if they were in fact available, the unions of all persons, would have been able to seek them out because they are constantly looking for doctors to carry forward cases to Com pensa tion. They are con sta ntly looking for doctors to deal with industrial hazards that they find at their work places. 1058

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 But having done that, even if there were several hundred and I don't even think the Minister thinks it would be that number of persons who consider the mselves expert in one or more areas of occupational hygiene and medicine, even if, that would not preclude the necessity or preclude one of the motivations to have an industrial health centre.

The industrial health centre would be a focal point. lt would be a pla ce where people would automatically look to for that kind of information because let us assume that there are 100 doctors out there who consider themselves expert; I'm not saying that there are. Let's just use that as a round figure number.

They're tucked away in different areas, they are isola ted from each other because there is no faculty of occupational medicine although I know it is one of the areas that the Advisory Council has looked into and is still looking into, and I wish them every bit of luck with their deliberations in that regard. The fact is that there is no faculty of occupational medicine now in Manitoba. You can't blame Manitoba because there are not very many across the country, I think maybe Ontario is the only one where they have an occupational med icine faculty that's set up and functioning well.

I may be wrong in that but that's my understanding of the situation. So it's certainly not Manitoba's problem alone, it's all of our problem. But with the lack of an occupational health faculty, there is no focal point for doctors to go for information for reference. There is no focal point for workers to go for information in reference or for emp loyers to go because we know the employers are concerned with industrial diseases and occupational hazards within their own workplaces.

We may argue as to the extent of that concern but I'm certain that they make enquiries from time to time as to where they can get good medical expert advice in respect to the problems that they have. There is a gr eat necessity for that sort of focal point; I think an occupational health centre in this province could provide that; therefore, even if there were 10 0 doctors tucked away that had some limi ted or even great expertise in occupational health, it would not answer the problem.

The non-unionized work force, the gener al pu blic, the emplo yers themselves would probably not have access to the names and pla ces and a list would not provide to them the type of emphasis that is necessary. I encourage the Minister to not only do that action which he has sug gested he will do, which we consider to be an important step but unacceptable on its own, but to pursue it further, to continue the discussions with the University of Manit oba in respect to a faculty of occupational medicine.

I understand that those aren't proceed ing too quickly and that's why we offer our encouragement and support to the Minister in that respect, as well as to talk with his colleagues and try to encourage them to make Man itoba a front runner in respect to occupational health and safety and to establish an occ upational health centre in this province. - (Interjection)- I apologize to the Minister.

I'd like to just go back to the lung function tests and the x-ray tests for one moment, make one other point which I had forgotten to make before; that's in respect to the issuing of a licence by the department to persons who have taken the test Can the Minister change the terminology that's used so as to clarify the situation to the individual who is rece1v1ng a permit to work underground in order to ensure they do not interpret that licence as a carte blanche appr oval of their lung function tests and their x-rays? MR. MacMASTER: That point can be considered un der dis cussions with Labour and with Management.

MR. COWAN: I just wanted to make that point because I think it is an important area that has to be addressed; I know there's a great deal of confusion, at least in Northern Manitoba.

I'm aware that the lung function tests are also performed and the x-rays are also taken on individuals outside the minin g industry but I have less cont act with foundry workers and other workers so I can only bring to this table the questions that have been presented to me by the min ers in this respect, but I know it's a larger problem than that and that the lung function tests do take in a larger occupational sector than just the mining industry.

Moving to another su bject , I would ask the Minister if he can provide us with any indication as to the activities of two Sub-Comm ittees of the Advisory Council, the Asbestos Sub-Comm ittee and the Construction Indus try Sub-Commi ttee. I know that both of those have been involved with the comple tion of regulations, or at least the development of regulations as well as trying to bring forward some public information in respect at least to the hazards of asbestos, and I'm certain in respect to the construction industry as well. MR.

MacMASTER: The Asbestos Sub-Commit tee has done a lot of surveying of contractors who are knowledgeable in the asbestos field in co-operation with the Winnip eg Construction Associa tion. They have been surveying workers who are knowledgeable ab out asbestos in co-opera tion again with the Construction Trades Council. They are presently drafting an information publication on asbestos.

They are presently putting together proposed regulations on asbestos control and discussions have been held with concerned gr oups such as the Ma nitoba Association of Architects, Engi neers, a variety of organizations in the province who in one way or another touch the asbestos scene in the province. MR.

COWAN: I know that one of the members of the Construction Industry Sub-Committee mentioned that the construction industry had done a survey on asbestos, had termed it, and these are his words, an "amateur" survey but what that survey did show was that many people were unaware of the hazards associated with asbestos. So there is a great need for some public informational campaign as well as an industry informational campaign to be undertaken. This is one of the most well documented of the serious carcinogenic problems that we have in this province.

I think all the cases of occupational cancer which had been approved by the Worker s Compensation Board in this province - perhaps I shouldn't make the generalization "all" - I think that the vast majority, that's a safer way to phrase it, of the occupational cancer cases which have been com pensated by Workers Compensation Board in this province have been those related to asbestos exposure in some way. So it is the best documented 1059

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 area of concern that we have in respect to the situation here in Manitoba. So I would ask the Minister if he can be more specific in giving us a date as to when we can expect regulations and when we can expect the public document, the booklet which has been prepared based on material from other jurisdictions which is probably a very good booklet which has been prepared, will be published. MR. MacMASTER: We expect the publication to be ready for distribution in approxi mately a month. On the construction end of thi ngs, the fi rst-aid regulations are being reviewed.

A code of procedure for confined entry and excavat ion which is very imp ortant to the construction ind ustry is being worked on presently. We are also endeavouring to establish a safety committee structure which may be somewhat awkward for the construction industry but we'r e st ill work ing at it and the uni ons and management have now agreed that that procedure in some way should be put into practice and general construction reg ulati ons are being reviewed for possible suggestions to myself. MR.

COWAN: The question which I addressed the Minister was one of when we can expect regulations in respect to asbestos control in this province as well. He answered part of it but that was the part that he hadn't answered. MR. MacMASTER: The commit tee is still working on them, Mr. Chairman, and I do not have a definite date when they'll be prepared to bring them forth for recommendation. MR.

COWAN: The reason I asked that is because almost six months ago or even more than six months ago one of the representatives of the Specification Writers Association of Canada, Vice President of Construction, Specification Canada, said and I quote "That the specification writers are aware of the asbestos problem but until it is legis lated they can only do so much". What they say they do is bring it to the attention of the client but then it is up to the client to decide whether or not they are going to include asbestos in the construction of their buildings and their edifices.

He also says and I quote again and these are quotes from the sub -comm ittee mi nutes of the Advisory Council dealing with asbestos. The quote is: "I ndustry in general is not sufficiently interested in the problem," and the Minister is aware of that.

That's no reflection on industry, it's just a reflection on the ability of society to change quickly to new found hazards although asbestos is not a new-found hazard - perhaps I shouldn't be so kind it's a hazard that's been around for quite some time and the history of it is a very varied history and one which is rampant with exam ples of neg lect by industry and others in respect to controlling this very hazardous substance.

So what the individual is saying in this respect is that they know there is a problem, but unless there's some teeth in the legislation, unless there is some regulation, something to grab hold of, they are going to be unable to deal with the problem because it's up to their client and they have a client relationship and it's up to their client to determine whether or not that asbestos goes in if the client dir ects them to do so, they must do so. They are also concerned that industry is not sufficiently interested in the problem. Those are their words, not mine; although it would be my impression as well.

We kno w that cl ose to a year ago a dr aft reg ul ation was di stri buted to the asbestos community so we know that they have been dealing for quite some time with it and we hope that the Minister would have been more specific as to when we could see that regulation come forward. There are other areas of concern here especially in respect to the asbestos situation in the schools which is one which has been an ongoing problem, which the government has taken some action but again we don't belie ve enough action in respect to.

However, we wish to save those di scussions for another department 's Estimates where we can talk about them in more detail. We do have to commend on the basis of the information we have now, the depa rt ment's involvement in asbestos removal procedu res.

Manitoba seems to be in the forefront in respect to putting together good teams that can remove asbestos, however, we have to condemn at the same time the lack of regulations, the lack of what we believe to be a comprehensive review of buildings for asbestos and positive action to make certain that asbestos is not brought into the environment in any greater numbers than it absolutely has to be. There are safe su bstitutes now which can pretty well preclude the total discontinu ance of the use of asbestos so that's another area of concern.

In respect to the construction indus try we're looking forward to the regulations, we know that the construction ind ustry says if they need separate regulations that are separated from the industrial safety regulations and we would like to see that accomplished as soon as possible because that's another very hazard ous profe ssion, and that committee has been around now for a year-and-a half and we would hope that they would be coming forward with some very concrete suggestions as to what those regul ations should be.

As well, we kn ow that they are work ing on attempting to set up a functional Workp lace Safety and Health Commit tee system for construction industries. Of course the Minister is aware that there are difficulties in that in respect to the type of specific work-site activity where you have a work force rotating through it and ther e is some discontinuity on the part of the workers and the part of any committee. So those regulations should be forthcoming in the near future too, we would hope.

In speaking of regulations we have been asking for a couple of years now for regulations on lead and of course there is a lead in benzol regulation in place now but we do not belie ve it to be comprehensive enough. I would ask the Minis ter if they are antici pa ting putting any regulations in pl ace respect ing the use of lead and if they are not, if he can inform us as to any changes that are anticipated in their so-called Lead Control Program. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, there are no regulations being proposed as this particular time.

We are looking at the possibility of reducing the levels that are currently in pla ce in the province deemed to be acceptable at this time but that is outside of the program that we have in pla ce which 1060

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 has worked with a degree of success. There is no regulations being contemplated in at this time. MR. COWAN: We have to admit that program has worked with a degree of success in one industry or one specific site for certain, and it took a 2 by 4 as the Minister indicated yesterday, to get some action. However, we're not so certain that it's worked at the other pla ces where it has been directed and I don't think the Minister could state with any sense of fi nal ity that it has worked in the ins tance of Nor thwest Smelting and Refining to be specific.

We're also quite concerned that it has not been extended to other areas where there's most likely a problem with lead. There have been some surveys done. The Minister has not provided us with copies of those su rveys. We have asked for them and we are concerned that there is not enough being done to route out this problem wherever it exists.

However, we have had some long talks on this particular subject and I don't wish to belabour it just to put on the record that we st ill have those concerns, we will have other opportunities to discuss them, and allow the Minister an oppor tuni ty to provide us with an update. We know that it has been suggested by experts that the levels that they are using presently are not acceptable levels in other jurisdictons and that other areas are dropping the levels quickly because as our knowledge of the problem becomes gr eater there is a necessity to drop those levels.

The situation is going to get worse instead of better, at least our awareness of the situation is going to make it appear to get worse rather than better. So we are concerned that not enough is being done in that particular area. I don't know if the Minister wants to comment on that. As I say, there are other opportunities which we will probably take advantage of although I can't promise the same. The, and I don't have the news clipping before me, it's somewhere here and I haven't been able to put my finger on it.

But there is a news clipping in respect to occupational cancer in this province and one of the representatives of the Worker s Comp ensation Board said that he felt that the compensable cases for occupational cancer in this province clearly reflected the extent of occupational cancer in this province. I'd ask the Minister if he can provide us with some insight as to his own opinion as to what appears to be a wide dis crepanc y between the statistical perception of the problem and the perception of the problem on the part of that repr esentative of the Workers Compensation Board. MR. MacMASTER: I can't, Mr.

Chairman, I haven't read the statement by the member of the Workers Compensation Board. I have to advise the Member for Churchill as all other members that I would want the representative of that particular organization to give me a statement not necessar ily what he said in the newspaper, that paragraph 4 and paragraph 14 might have been used in the newspaper, with no disrespect to them. But if the Compensation Board has a statement to make to me in that regard, I'l l make a note of it and ask them to make it to me specifically so I can deal with it. MR.

COWA N: Perhaps you will allo w me to approach the situation in that respect and maybe I can better rephrase the question. We know in 1978 there were just under 5,0 00 cancer cases in Manitoba, if we use 19 78 figur es, and we know statistically that anywhere from 50 to 1, 000 - and I'm using the low end of the statistics and the high end of the statistics - of those cases will be occupationally related and the figure that is most often used is in the area of 20 percent.

Some scientis ts suggest that it's one perc ent, some scientists suggest that it's 40 percent and my office says that it's anywhere from 22, I believe, to 38 percent, but 20 percent is the figure that is generally accepted as that percentage of cancer which is caused by occupational factors. So what we have is an area where we can expect anywhere from 50 to 1, 000 workers in this province to have contacted cancer as a result of occupational exposures and therefore should be compensable, that cancer should be compensable.

However, what happens and what has happened is that the average number of cancer cases identified by the Mani toba Workers Compensation Board amounts to less than a couple, or about a couple each year for the last 10 years, so the discrepancy between the statistical estimation and the identified causes is very obvious and I would ask the Minister if he will agree with this statement.

The statement is, that occupational cancer, if one uses the Workers Compensation Board figur es, is gr ossly underidentified in the Province of Manitoba, as in all provinces, I don't mean to restrict that statement to this province, it has nothing to do with the government in place, I want to make that very clear. I am not attacking the Minister on this, I'm just saying that that statement appears to me to be a true statement and I would ask the Minister if he would agree with that. MR. MacMASTER: Mr .

Chairman, knowing what can or cannot be done with statistical information and reports, as the Member has said, there are some very supposedly intelligent people in the world that claim 1 percent, some claim 5, 10 , 15, 20 percent, and the Member is right, some claim a very larger percentage. I, as the Minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board, am not going to say they are delinquent in their duties of assessing who is and who isn't. I don't think it's my role at this particular point.

I wou ld hope that they' re using the best knowledgeable professional people at their disposal, of which they have many, to make their determinations. The numbers certainly are somewhat dif ferent to some public ations that are produced across the country and I am not going to take the side of any one of the publications that the member might wish to use, be it the 1 percent or the 40 percent.

I think the Compensation Board is doing their best, going into a very difficult, sensitive, awkward area with the information that they have at hand and I am not prepared to chastise or question their judgment at this particular time. MR. COWAN: A quick question to the Minister, would he therefore agree with the statement that the percentage of cancers that can be dir ectly related to occu pational exposur e, would be somewhere between 1 and 40 percent? MR. MacMASTER: I know the numbers game and the Member for Churchill is smiling; 1 percent of 1061

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 something equals much more than the Compensation Board is presently ... that's not a new approach to the Member for Churchill. No, I'm simply saying that the Com pensation Board is doing what they deem to be their best today. There are decisions made across our country, and not only in Canada but in the United States, that are being used as landmarks and opening up the way tor review by compensation boards of their present positions in all jurisdictions in the country.

Those types of decisions are being made, I suppose not daily, but periodically decisions are made by boards and medical officials and medical knowledgeable people that are laying claim to establishing cases on behalf of workers, which are then in some cases deemed to be acceptable and compensation boards are changing their approach on their considrations of different evidences that are produced daily across this country. MR.

COWAN: I assure the Minister that I am not attempting to play a numbers game in this respect, although I want to draw the obvious parallel between the identified causes and the estima ted causes, because I think it does show that we are grossly underidentifying the extent of occupational cancer in this province. But I'm not doing that to suggest that the Workers Compensation Board is delinquent in their duties.

I'm suggesting perhaps, their duties have been not outlin ed to them well enough, have not been specified to them well enough, but I think that if anyone is delinquent in this respect it's not the Minister, it's not the Minister's government, it's not our government, it's not our parties, it's not any ind ividual group; it's certai nly not the Workers Compensation Board, but it is society in whole. lt is society in general that has been delinquent for far too long in respect to this and it's only through the use of these sorts of opportunities that we can bring this situation to the awareness of the public and try to convince them to approach the problem in a different way, because the way that it's being approached now it not the right way.

I can say that categorically. I am certain that the Workers Compensation Board is doing its best in respect to the opportunities that are provide d to it to do things in respect to occupational cancer. that sounds a bit confused, but what I'm saying is, given the attitudes of society, given the attitudes of all of us, given the information that they have, that it's very difficult for them to do much dif ferent than they are doing, although I reserve the right to question any specific judgment that they make, as I know the Minister would reserve the right to question any specific judgment.

I think that it is up to the Minister and the government to provide them with greater dir ection in regard to identifying and compensating cancer cases. it's my understanding, and I don't have access to all the information and it is sometimes difficult to get the information which we want, but it's my understanding that most of the cancer cases which have been filed with the Board and have been accepted, were filed with asbestos as a causitive agent and I've said that before. I believe there have been 19 asbestosis claims as of last year received by the Board and that number may be altered by one or two.

The vast majority of those were file d by insulation workers who, of course, have come in close contact with asbestos for a number of years, although they are not by far the only ones to have come in contact with asbestos; 68 percent of the 19 have di ed al ready and 26 percent died of mesothilioma. Now, mesothilioma as the Minister knows, is a type of cancer which is dir ectly attributable to asbestos exposure. it's rare outside of asbestos exposure.

I'm not even sure if it can be found outside of those persons who have not had asbestos exposure, but at least it has been very closely linked with asbestos exposure. We know that 11 percent of those who made those asbestosis claims died of lung cancer.

But if we start to mix the figures again - I don't want to pla y the numbers game, I don't want it to be perceived as playing the numbers game - what I want to say, is that the figures that we have now show us that something is drastically wrong with the way in which we compens ate cancer claims. it's been found through the li ter ature and through epidemiologic al studie s tha t ther e shou ld be statistically five lung cancers to every mesothilioma cancer owing to asbestos exposure.

If that's the case and we have five identif ied in the Province of Manitoba then we would expect 25 lung cancers related to asbestos exposure. I mean it happens everywhere else, why doesn't it happen here. Well, I would suggest that it does happen here. The fact is that because we have only identified and compen sated a couple of lung cancer cases that we are grossly underestimating and under-identifying the extent of occupationally induced lung cancer as a result of asbestos exposure. That's just one area.

We all know that there are great numbers of suspected cancer agents, about 2,000 to be exact, even though there are far lesser numbers, under a couple of dozen, of clearly identified positive known cancer agents. The difference is based on experience mostly.

But we know that outside of the cancer cases that were brought before the board on dealing with asbestosis that five of the seven claims were rejected and that the three that were accepted were listed as asbestos exposure as a causative factor so the board is not looking at other factors so the board is not looking at other factors outside of asbestos exposure for compensation for cancer and yet we know that there are other factors.

So, it's an area of great concern, it's an area where we need to review and rethink our entire approach and I hope the Minister would direct the Workers Compensation Board to unde rtake that sort of very imp ortant activity. I promised the Minister yesterday that we would, barring any outside problems finish by the Private Members' Hour with this particular

section of the Estima tes and I intend to keep that promise. I would ask if any of the other persons in the panel have any questions now because I don't want to be perceived as running through the last few minutes. However, I wili have questions if others don't. MR. FOX: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, I was going to ask the Minister in respect to the construction retr aining program that is going on whether there was going to be - this was conjunction to the fact that there was quite a lot of unemp loyment in this area whether there was going to be any special emphasis with respect to some of these safety programs on that educational program or is it just going to be a straight retrai ning and upgrading of personnel? 1062

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, a portion of the upgrading course for the tradesmen which we have impl emented a week ago, I guess it is, a portion of that upgrading course di rectly relates to Workplace Safety. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Logan. MR. WILLIAM JENKINS (Logan): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have two or thr ee questions for the Minis ter. For the 438 Health and Safety commit tees in place in the province can the Mini ster report how often do these committe es meet? Do they meet weekly, bi-we ekly, monthly? Are Mi nutes of the meet ings kept?

And do es the Health Safety committee receive any notice of Minutes or copies of Min utes that are kept of those meetings? And if so, what rec ommendations have th ese committe es made, not only to the Min ister but to their own management with regard to impr oving the health and safety regulations in the work areas th at th ey represent? And if none of these things are in the af firma ti ve, then how does the Min ister's staff de termine if the commi tte es are active and functioning as laid out in the legislation? MR. MacMA STER: Mr. Chairman, the Safety Commi ttees are required to meet once every three months.

By and large they meet once a month and a copy of their Mi nutes are forwarded to the Workpla ce Safety Division. MR. JENKINS: Does anybody review these Minutes and what recommendations have these commi ttees made in any way, shape or form for im proving health and safety regulations to the Mi ni ster? MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman , it is a difficult question to answer because there are hund reds, and hundreds, and hundreds of sets of Minut es.

Our Workpla ce Safety Division deals with th ese committees and when they go in and deal with the comm itte es we put on many many seminars for employers and emp loyees and their problems are dealt with and discussed and our advice, sought or otherwise, I might add, is given on the possibilities of easing out of the problems that they find themselves in, and recommendations how to deal with some of the situations that they discuss. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Churchill. MR.

COWAN: ... to try to sum up our impr essions of this particular sect ion of the Est ima tes we consider, or at least I consider this to be one of the most im portant sections of the Estima tes. I am certain that the Mi nister considers it to be very im portant as well. I only wish that we had the time to pursue all the areas which need pursuit. However, we would be here for quite some time and we would have to sit late into the night and there is always another opportunity, another time, to bring forward the questions which are either unasked or unanswered during the course of the Estima tes.

But we do believe that now, given this is our fourth set of Estimates, that we should make some general statement as to our perception as to what has happened in this department and what should be happening. We have some general criticisms to bring forward and that is not meant as reflection on the Mini ster and it certainly is not meant as a reflection on the emp loyees in the division. It is meant perhaps as a reflection on society. It is meant perhaps as a reflection on us all.

However, we will specify areas where we think the government has failed because that is our purpose here today and we will specify areas where we think they can achieve progress because that as well is our purpose. And we will also specify areas where we think we have suggestions, which should be brought to the attention of the Minis ter and the Min ister has indicated that he will receive them in the manner in which they are given and give them all due consideration. That is not to say that we are indicating, or anticipating that he will take all of them forward in the way in which they are presented.

But I'm certain that he will give them the type of consideration that is necessary. We still believe that there are inadequate staffing levels in this particular part of the department and again I have to specify that is no reflection on the individuals in the department. We just do not belie ve that this area which is one of the most important areas under the Mi nister's responsibility has been given the type of attention and priorization that is necessary.

The Min ister is certainly not to fault for that because he had a very difficult situation to work with when he first took over responsibility for this portfolio and there had been staffing level drops and there have been drops in the amount of money available to the division. However, since that time we have still not seen the type of progress which we think is necessary.

We do take great exception to the fact that there are no regulations, that it has been three years since this de partment, the Min ister has had some responsibility for this department or the government has had responsibility for this department and all we've heard is a lot of talk and no action in respect to regulations. Now, the Minister will tell us that they are under review; the Mini ster has told us that they are under review; the Minis ter will tell us that it is a difficult problem and maybe he overestimated the ability of the department to put those regulations in place.

Perhaps it was a matter of over-enthusiastic approach to providing deadlines and schedules. However, not one regulation acco rding the the information which has been provided to us in this Estimates has been brought forward. It has not been finalized. Let's look at the regulations that have been talked about, the construction ind ust ry, wants the construction safety regulations separated from the industrial safety regulations. That's been reviewed and redrafted where necessary and yet we see no regulations.

The Min ister promised us and in all fairness to him, he said it was probably an over enthusiastic promise to come forward with hearing conservation regulations but they have not come through. Those regulations have not come through. The first-aid regulation, and given the scope of all reg ulations, a fai rly sim ple regulation to bring forward, it's not a complex area. It's been two years in the making; it was sent for legislative review last year, March of 19 80 or before that even, and we still have no regulation before us. The logging regulation has been in preparation for nearly a year.

The rollover protective structures 1063

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 regulation has been a year in the works as well. The asbestos regulation has been mentioned from time to time for close to a year now. The regulation for lead which the Minister indicates he has no intention of bringing forward is one which we think is necessary and we are disappointed that they are not going to bring one forward.

Even where we have a situation where the reg ulations that currently exis t toda y are not consistent with other reg ul ations and legislation within the province, we have no action, such as the spray -painting regulation in the sanitary and hygenic welfare regula tion, where the first is not consis tent with the Manitoba Fire Code and the second is not consistent with the Manitoba Building Code and yet we don't have those inconsistencies clarified. Perhaps the Minister wants those regulations in place, I don't know and I don't intend to impute motives on to the Minister.

However, we know his govern ment's attitude in respect to regulation and deregulation. We know his political party's attitude in respect to the impor tance of regulations or perhaps it should be better phrased, the non-im portance of re gultions. They see them as some thing that hamper s rather than some thin g that helps; something that hinders rather than something that assists; but the fact is that we believe that these regulations are overdue. We believe that they are very necessary and that belief of ours is not ours alone.

That belief of ours is shared by the Advisory Cou ncil; that belie f of ours is shared by the employers in this province. As I had ind icated, even the Specification Writers Associa tion sugges ted those regulations have to be forthcoming before any sort of posit ive action will be taken. So the regulations are necessary. The emplo yees and the unio ns want tho se regulations and the Min ister tells us time and time again that he's going to bring those regulations forward and they don't happen. Wel l, we would certainly welcome them when they come but we are tir ed of hearing about them.

We want to see some thing on paper; we want to see something brought forward. We want to see something go through the Manitoba Gazette because they are important. The Minister knows they are important to all those groups which I mentioned before and know they are important.

They are important for guidance and in that respect we want to see codes of practice come forward with them and they are important for providing protection and supplementing a very good Act, The Workplace, Safety and Health Act, which by the way needs some amendments. lt needs some amendments; it needs some changes because it's been in place for a time now. We've an opportunity to watch it work and we know that there are areas that need clarifica tion; we know that there are areas that need some extension. We know there is that probably aren't working properly and need changes.

That's no reflection on the previous government; they put forward a good Act, a very well developed Act, but we all know that from time to time we have to review legislation, we have to see how it's working and we have to change those mistakes that were inadvertently built in as well as we have to make changes in that legislation which reflect the changing society, the new kn owledg e that has become available to us, the di fferent app roaches to problems.

So we think that those regulations should be forthcoming and if I can specify one regulation which is probably the most complex and most compl icated but perhaps the most needed regulation, I would specif y one on toxic chemicals, on lab elling, on handling, on storage, on working with those chemicals. it's an area that the Minister has said that we're going to see some action but, again, we have not seen the action and we're disappointed that we haven't seen the action because we know that he knows the impo rtance of that particular regula tion.

We know that the Advisory Council which is the main group in this province entrus ted to advise the Minister of problem areas has suggested as early as October 14, 1977, three days after the last elec tion, that there is a need to co-ordina te federal and provincial action in the area of toxic su bstance contol. They said this is so important that we want this conveyed to both the new Minister, who is not the Minister that's before us today but the previous Minister under the Cons ervative Government, and tha t Mini ster 's Deputy Mi nister at the earli est possible convenience.

We know a week or two later or a month later, they say that they feel that at present there is very little done in the way of legal control of such substances in Manitoba. We know the Minister has said that. The Minister said that in Esti mates la st year that there is some ma jor problems with chemicals and if we were to put this on the table of the Advisory Council at their next meeting they could come up with exactly the same statement. lt needs to be priorized and there's very little by way of control.

Now that is not an area where the Minister can act alone because other provinces have tried to act alone and if we should do anything as legislators we should look to what's happening in other jurisdictions to see what mistakes have been made and what positive action has been taken and then develop in respect to our own phi losophy, applied that information to our philosophy, and develop what we consider to be appropria te courses of action.

But we would hope that the Minister at the very least would be calling together all the provincial Ministers, all the persons involved in this area and the Federal Government because they must play such a key and essential role in the development of these regulations and bring forward a comprehensive plan to put in place the type of legislation and regulations which is so long overdue and so very necessary before a desperate situation becomes even more desperate.

There are areas where the Minister, as a provincial representative, can take it upon himself to put in place regulations in respect to toxic chemicals and the jurisdiction would be all that of the provinces, such as the storage of those and the handling of those, the testing of them, the setting of threshold limit values and the setting of certain requirements for them. But it's a problem that has to be app roached in co-operation with the other provinces and the Federal Government and we would just hope that we would see more positive action in respect to bringing that together to have all that happen.

We are also concerned that the codes of practice which are not certai nly a replacement for regulations but are a suppl ement and an explanation of regulations dealing with confined entry, excavation, first aid and heat stress, all codes of practice which have been promis ed have not come forward yet. 1064

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 We believe that, as does the Minister believe, to his credit, education is such an essen tial part of the work and the activity of the Workplace, Safety and Health Branch and that education has to take certain forms. And the codes of practice is one way in which information can be brought forward to workers, that they can be provided educational mechanisms to enable them to better understand the problems that they confront and the solutions which may in fact assist them in confronting those problems.

We are also extremely critical of the Minister's - and excuse me, I don't want to reflect upon the Minister - of the department 's inability to meet the Minister's schedules. Now whether that's a problem with the department or a problem with the Minister will have to be determined internally; however, I have in the past commended the depar tment, in my experience with them, in dealing with them, they have been extremely speedy in their responses.

As a matter of fact, they have been much faster than I have been sometimes in responding to requests and they have always come forward with what I believe to be acc eptable and excellent information and responses to those requests. But there is some thing has to be done because we have been told so many times of goals that were expected to be fulfilled and all we had ended up with in the end result was unfulfilled expectations. Now the Minister has said that he was perhaps over-enthusiastic.

I have suggested that's a fault of all of us who see a problem and want very dearly to see that problem dealt with but that does not excuse each and every instance and there are just too many instances.

The Mine Safety Review Committee is one wher e we had dela ys durin g the comm ittee, unavoidable delays perhaps but delays nonetheless, and yet we had a report that came forward last year and we don't see any positive action coming out of that report because there's been another commit tee to look at that and we're not certain what will happen with the reco mm endations of the impl ementation committee but we know that there have been problems there.

Yet we kno w that there were certain recommen da tions that came out of the Wright Commi ttee Report on the metallic mining industry and safety conditions in that industry that could have been imp lemented im mediately had the Min ister chosen to take that course of action. We had only hoped that he would have done that. lt might have resulted in safer conditions in the metallic mining industry but he chose not to. We are concerned that nothing has come forward yet even though it's indicated that it should come forward shortly.

We are most concerned that when it does come forward we don't know what's going to happen with it because the Minister in the past has told us that he's relying upon information from other bodies such as the Advisory Council and the Advisory Council provide him with very specific information, very strong suggestions, recom mendations and resol utions and he ignored it. He ignored it and he said, I am the Minister and I have a right to ignore it and he's absolutely correct.

He is Minister and they are only recommendations made to him but then ple ase don't tell us that he expects very good criteria to come out of that. Please don't tell us that he's going to act immediately upon the receipt of that information if that is not the case. The same with the Workers Compensation Review. We hope that the review - and I have not seen the review yet, I know that it is a lengthy review and that's about all I know about it beside the fact that it's at the printers but we hope that is worth the wait.

I am certain that it will be worth the wait but again it's a matter of deadlines not being met, of dates being set that were unfulfilled. In respect to informational bulletins and we think that's a very imp ortant activity of the province, we thank the Mi nister for prov iding those of them that have developed to us as speedily as he did, however, not enough have been developed - in the Minister's own words and in our own words.

You know, two years ago, the Minister said that he wanted to work them into a regular series that would come out on a monthly basis. lt was what he at that time called a newsletter or part of a newsletter. Now we heard a promise of that newsletter again two years later in these Estimates but we have not seen a newsletter. We think it is probably an impo rtant function of the division but we have not seen it and we have seen very few informational bulletins. We have not certainly seen informational bulletins on the basis of one a month.

Again, we severely critic ize and expect to be bringing this up at other opportunities, the Minister's decision not to appoint a Chief Medical Officer. I don't want to remind the Minister that he gave us guar antees in this committee two years ago that that was going to happen in the very near future and he has given us guar antees again and again that it was going to happen and yet just the other night, last night, he said, no, he had changed his mind and he couldn't provide us, or at least in my opinion, he couldn't provide us with an acceptable reason for changing his mind.

We bring up the fact that the jurisdiction dispute in Flin Flon and Snow Lake with who actually has responsibility for the Workplace, Safety and Health in those areas has not been settled yet. lt's a problem, in all fairness to the Minister, it's a longstanding problem and when they were in Opposition they were bringing it forward to our government. I went back and looked. At that time they were sayi ng, when are you going to do something about it? We have to take some responsi bili ty for not being able to accomplish what the Minister has said that he will be able to accomplis h and I hope he is.

I hope he is able to deal with that but the fact is it has not been done yet. We belie ve that the approach of the Minister to the Safety and Health Comm ittees is a wrong ap proach. We belie ve that the Advis ory Council gave him go od informa tion, a good suggestion and he rejected that. Now in the few moments that are left to me, I just want to say why we are. so concerned about this, because this is a very major problem in this province. As we said before, we believe that the extent of industrial dis ease, we beli eve that the extent of occupational ill ness is under-estimated in this province.

So the statistics that we are going to be giving to you at this point are given with that caveat but in the first 11 months of 1980, there were 43,046 accidents reported to the Workers Com pensation Board of Manitoba. That is a significant problem for the Province of Manitoba, much less for the individuals who experience those 1065

Tuesday, 24 February, 1981 accidents. Now, not all those accidents were serious accidents. Some of them were accidents that were those requiring medical aid only but I can base an as sump tion, given statistics of past years, that thousands of those were tempor ary disabilities and permanent disabilit ies numbered in the hundreds and fatalities numbered in the scores.

So the situation is not getting much better if it is getting better at all and that is the reason why we want the comm ittees; that is the reason why we want the Chief Medical Occupational Officers; that is the reason we want the regulations, not for the sake of them themselves but because there's a very serious problem. We think that the pro blem with occupational cancer is one of the major pro blems in this province.and again I don't mean to isolate Manitoba; in all provinces in all the industrial world. We are not satisfied that the Workers Compensation Board is taking the right approach.

We don't think they're delinquent but we don't believe that they have been given the right direction. I know the Minister wants to give them the right dir ection and I hope that he will give them the right direction, but he himself would have to admit I think if he was so inclined, that given the statistical evidence, the difference between the esti mation and the identif ication of occupational cancer is so grossly out of line that we have to direct some very quick attention and very quick action to it and we're not even talking about industrial diseases.

If we are beginning to get a handle on occupational cancer, we still have a major problem with industrial diseases and that will come up during this session and other sessions no matter who's in government, there will be consideration of developing better means of dealing with industrial diseases. As well the problem is not one of just individuals losing income, losing livelihood, losing arms and legs if you want to be gross about it, it's a matter of society and it's a matter of the cost to society.

I'm read ing from a document which comes out of the Workplace, Safety and Health Division approximately four years ago, or three-and-a-half years ago, in which it stated at that time in 1976 the total costs of main benefits paid by Workers Compensation was $18,1 62,000 - we know it's up over $20 million now - and I'll be fin ished in just one min ute, Mr . Chairperson.

We know that if take the figures that are gi ven here, that for every dollar paid in compensation a further $8.00 to $1 5.00 are lost, we're talking about a problem that is costing our society hundreds of millions of dollars every year, and for the individuals, and for the society, and for the sake of all those who must face occupational hazards we can only encourage the Ministe

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-5-25a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 5th hansardpdf 25a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	55d27733ab2f20f1254dd125d999586dbc654ac9

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