LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Friday, 9 May, 1986. Time - 10:00 a.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon . M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions ... Reading and Receiving of Petitions ... Presenting Reports By Standing and Special Committees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , a statement . Madam Speaker , recently, as members of this House are aware, the United States Senate authorized the U.S. administration to enter into comprehensive trade negotations with Canada.

Last week in Toronto I met with the Premier of Ontario to discuss our provinces ' position on the negotiations . At the conclusion of our meeting , Premier Peterson and I reaffirmed our view that an early First Ministers' Conference is required to clarify arrangements for full provincial participation in the negotiations , in line with the agreement between all 10 Premiers and the Prime Minister at the Halifax First Ministers' Conference last November.

Although the Federal Government hasn't yet agreed to a special First Ministers' meeting, I am pleased to advise the House that the Secretary of State for External Affairs, the Right Honourab le Joe Clar k, will be coming to Winnipeg next Tuesday afternoon for bilateral discussions on the negotiating process. I understand he will also be visiting some of the other provincial capitals next week, and will be reporting to the Prime Minister when Mr. Mulroney returns to Canada from the Far East later this month. During next Tuesday's meeting, I will be advis ing Mr.

Clark that we expect the Federal Government to live up to the Halifax agreement on provincial participation, and that we believe it is absolutely essential that a First Ministers' Conference be held quickly, before the negotiations get under way. A great deal is at stake for Canada and for Manitoba in the upcoming negotiat ions. The talks offer potentially important and positive opportunities to expand trade. They are also vital to overcoming incr easing pressures of protectionism. But Canada's sovereignty must not be compromised in any way. Our agricultural support system must not be weakened .

Regional economic development programs must be continued and maintained and strengthened . Key social programs must be maintained . Safeguards must be provided for such vital service industries as transportation and for telecommunications. Canada's cultural sovereignty must also be preserved. 7 The Prime Minister and Mr. Cla rk are aware of our position on this and on other issues, such as the need for ongoing consultation with the provinces, the importance of multilateral trade negotiations, and the requirement for adequate adjustment provisions for sectors and industries affected by negotiations.

I will be reaffirming those positions next week. I am pleased to advise this House that Mr. Clark 's office has also agreed to include on the agenda for our meeting discussion of Manitoba's concern about possible U.S. nuclear waste dump sites in the Red River Basin. I understand Mr. Clark will be meeting his U.S. counterparts in the near future . This subject is likely to be covered in their discussions as well. I iritend to express our Government's appreciation to Mr. Clark for the cooperation that he and External Affairs have given to us, to this point , on the nuclear waste repository issue .

It is essential that we continue to work closely together to attempt to persuade the U.S. administration to remove the Red River Basin sites from any further consideration. I will also raise, once again, our concern about the future of the U.S . Consulate here in Winnipeg - particularly at a time when we are attempting to improve our trade relations with the United States, and are successfully expanding other cooperative links with our neighbouring states of Minnesota and North Dakota. A reversal of the U.S.

State Department's decision to close the Winnipeg Consulate and several others in Europe and South America may not be possible, but we are optimistic that a significant U.S. Government presence can be maintained in our province . I will report to the House on the results of the meeting with Mr. Clark next week . Thank you, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable the Leader of the Opposition . MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speake r. I'm pleased to respond to the statemen t that has been made by the First Minister with respect to a number of init iatives .

I begin by saying that all of us believe that there is the potential for enhancement of our economy in Manitoba as a result of freer trade negotiations and discussions and opportunities that can accrue to particularly Western Canada , and Manitoba as well , through freer trade with the United States .

We believe that those opportunities are worth pursuing, and worth pursuing in a manner that ensures that we put forward, as strongly as possible, the benefits for the Manitoba economy on the table and in the discussions, and that we ensure that we do not just simply fall in lock step with the position that some other groups have taken. I think that there is a concern on our part that perhaps the Premier has changed his position with respect to free trade, that a year-and-a-half ago or so when he

• Friday, 9 May, 1986 was speaking before the Western Premiers' Conference, and he said that he wa s in fa vour of freer trade with the Unit ed St at es, we all thought that was an encouraging sign of an openness in his ap proach to freer trade. We're concerned now that his statements sound more and more protecti onist, more and more as though he is being twisted and shaped by the CLC positi on, by the positi on of the federa l New Democrats under Ed Broadbent, which is no, no, a thousand times no.

His statements more an d more seem to in dicate that his concerns are not for the benefits of Manitob a and Manitob a's economy , but rather to try an d allo w him to change his positi on and come around behind those people who support the New Democratic Party in Manitob a .

Madam Sp eaker, our concern wi ll be that if this First Minister is reall y of the mind that Manitoba has to put forwa rd a complete and balanced view at the table for free trade negotia tions, that he should fi rst set forth an all -party committee that would study the Manitob a pos it i on for free trad e that would brin g fo rwa rd representati on from all sectors of our economy , from agr ic ultur e, from the cul tural sector and from manufacturing so that we would know what the positi ons are of these va rious different groups of our economy .

We would know that we are indeed representing the best in terests of Manitob a when we go to these free trade discus si ons. Madam Sp eaker, I would urge the First Minister to set up such an all-p arty committee and to ensure that it solicits the views of all people. I ap peared at the Annual Meeting of the Manitob a Chamb er of Commerce, as did other representatives in this Cham ber, and I know that they're very concerned that Manitob a should receive the benefits of a freer trade agreement, that Manitob a should be a parti ci pant in this in a positive sense.

I know as well that members of our caucus have met with agriculture groups in Manitoba and have received the sa me ki nd of urging, that we look to the benefits of freer trade, and we convert those benefits to positive action on behalf of the economy of Manitoba. So I would hope that the Premier, in addition to mak ing sure that Manitob a goes to the ta ble and discusses freer trade wi th the other provinces and with the Federal Government, that fi rst he would have that ki nd of consu ltative process right here in Manitob a and include all sectors in our economy .

Very briefly, Madam Sp eak er, with respect to the concerns ab out the location of a nuclear wa ste dump in Min nesota, in the wa tershed of the Red River Va lley, in deed all Mem bers of the House, I'm sure, concur wi th the positi on that the Premier has stated, that we ought not to have to accept the negative asp ects of somebody else's dealings in the nuclear in dustry; that we ought to ensure that we are protected from any haz ards that might accrue to Manitoba, and we cert ainly wi ll lend our voi ce in support to that initiative on behalf of the people of Manitoba.

Final ly, wi th respect to the imp ending closure of the U.S. Consulate, we are very conc erned wi th that, Madam Spe aker . We're very concerned that only one consulate in all of Canada is being closed and it happens to be the one in Manitoba. We have to ask ou rselves why that is occurr ing. We have to ask ourselves whether 8 the presence at a flag burning in front of the U.S.

Consulate, the presence of severa l members of this adm inistration, ind eed, the Deputy Premier and severa l Ministers of this Cabinet, had an ything to do wi th poisoning the relationships between Manitob a and our American neigh bours, our good friends and ne ighbour s to the South. We have to ask ourselves why the Manitob a Consulate is being singled out, and we have to say, Madam Sp eaker, that first and foremost there is going to have to be a change in attitude on the part of this Premier and this adm inistration towa rds our neighbours to the South.

No longer can we fi nd that kind of thing that happened when the flag wa s burned in front of the Embas sy in the presence of many members of this ad mi nistr at ion ca n ta ke place wi thout a full and complete apology by the Premier on behalf of this adm i nistration. Maybe the fi rst step towa rds having that consulate maintained open in Manitob a will be to have a full and complete apology by the Premier to our American neighbours. MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon our ab le Minister of Natur al Resou rces. HON. L.

HARAPIAK: Madam Sp ea ker, I ask leave of this House to make a non-political statement, copies of which are avai lable for distribution. MADAM SPEAKER: Leave? (Agreed). The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Sp ea ker, I would like to anno unce that this week is being celebrated as Forestry Week ... MADAM SPEAKER: The Opposition House Lead er. MR. G. MERCIER: On a point of order, not even havi ng had an opportun ity to review the contents of the statement, but it has been the practice of the House that a non-political statement is made at the end of question period.

MADAM SPEAKER: Is leave denied? The Honourab le Minister of Natural Resources on the point of order. HON. L. HARAPIAK: I would like to make a non-political ministerial statement. MADAM SPEAKER: Is leave granted to the Minister? Is leave granted to the Minister? - (Interjection) - On the point of order? The Opposition House Lead er. MR. G. MERCIER: On a point of order, Madam Sp eaker, if the Minister is making a mini sterial statement, he doesn't require leave. He doesn't require leave to make a ministerial statement.

MADAM SPEAKER: He wa s asking to make a non­ political statement, and asked for leave of the House. Does the House wi sh to give the Minister leave? A MEMBER: He doesn't require leave.

Friday, 9 May, 1986 MADAM SPEAKER: I rule that leave has been granted; the Minister may proceed. The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Sp ea ker, I would like to annou nce that this week is being celebrated as Forestry Week in Manitob a . More specif ically , today marks Arbor Day , a day on which many indiv iduals make a special effort to plant trees. The 19 86 theme for the week is "Your Forest - Your Future." This theme attempts to incr ease our level of awareness for the impor tance of the forests to all Manitobans.

Our forests ar e an im portant part of the resource base for the provin cial economy . Forests generate revenue of ap proxi mately $500 million annually , an d provide employment to 11 ,500 people directly and ind i rectly. In add ition , our forests are im portant in that they provide habitat for wi ldlife an d they are the setti ng in which residents and touris ts enjoy many hours of recreation and enjoyment. The seedling provided for ea ch of you is a selection of Japane se elm. This species is grown in Manitob a, and is noted for being su perior in growth form and stem strai ghtness.

But most im portant ly, it is resistent to Dutch Elm disease. I hope each of you wi ll plant your seedling, keeping in mi nd that the chances for surviva l are much impr oved if you delay transplant to the latter part of May. I would also like to in vite each of you to vi ew the many fine forest-related displays sponsored by the Mani toba Forestry Association at the Garden City Sho pping Centre here in Wi nnipeg, and encourage you to take

part in Forest Week activities. MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Tha nk you, Madam Sp eaker. Firstly, I'd like to congratulate the Minister of Natural Resources on his app ointmen t, and I wa nt to also thank him for the seedlings that he has presented to us in the long-time honour ed tradit ion.

I had some concerns when I sa w them and I wa s actu ally - well, not concerned when I saw them - pleased when I saw them because, wi th the indiscriminate cutt ing and scrapping that's go ing on within the Depa rtment of Natural Resources, I'm glad that they found the money to present these to us. I wa nt to ind ic ate to the Minister that I have planted the trees over the last yea rs since 19 77 and mine are all grow ing.

In expressing our ap precia tion for these seedlings here, I just wa nt to express a little concern that as much as we all like these trees I think at a time like this the Minister might have been more ap propriately ma king an ann ouncement about the serious flooding conditions that we have in the province. I would certai nly hope that he wi ll pursue that matter and maybe have ano ther statement in that rega rd. Thank you. MADAM SPEAKER: No tices of Mo ti on ...

Introduction of Bi lls . . 9 INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before pro ceedi ng to Oral Questions, I'd like to direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where there are 75 students of Grade 6 from the Shamr ock School. These students are under the directi on of Mr. T. Drieger. The school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Niakwa. On behalf of all the members I welcome you here this morning.

Before proceedi ng to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all members of the House, pa rtic ular ly the new member s, to the gu id eli nes respecti ng question period. I'd like parti cularly to draw members' attention to Item 1, which is: "A question mu st be a qu estion, must be bri ef, mu st seek in formation, must ad dress itself to an imp orta nt matter of some urgency , and must be wi thin the admi nistrative responsi bility of the Government or the Minister to whom it's addr essed." I would also like to remind members that a questi on should contai n a

preamble not exceedi ng one carefu lly drawn sentence, and supplementary questi ons should not need a pream ble. I should als o like to remind members that ans wers to questions should be as brief as possi ble and should deal wi th the matter raised and should not provoke debate. ORAL QUESTIONS Tax credit abuses - Minister of Crown MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Lea der of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Sp eaker. My question is for the Premier.

Approximately two weeks ago , the Minister of Energy and Mines ad mitted to his partici pation in a quick profit tax sea m, NERC 1985, which he sai d allo wed him to avoid pay ing $35,000 in taxes. Yet, ac cording to media reports, in formation from the Manitob a Securities Commission indic ates that an in vestor buying the number of shares he claims to have bought would have saved $58,000 and made an imm ediate profit of $1 6,000. 00. My question to the Premier is: has he asked the Minister of Energy and Mines for an explanation of this discrepancy? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Sp eak er, first I want to commend the Leader of the Opposition for asking the fi rst question I believe I've hea rd from him in some five yea rs, on the issue of national tax reform. lt is nice, inde ed, now that we do have sudden converts to tax reform, and I'm just very, very pleased that the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues are strongly in support of national tax reform at the federal an d, I assume , at the provincial level as well.

Madam Sp eak er, ins ofa r as the question of the Scient ific Ta x Credit, that is a matter that my Minister has fully disclosed in sofa r as his own personal dealings, 19 84 and 19 85, and has given in formation in respect to same.

Friday, 9 May, 1986 If there is any further clarification that is required, the Min ister will give that at the proper time and under the proper circumstances. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , I've clearly put before the Premier a question that indicates a difference and of major discrepanc y between the information which the Min ister of Energy and Mi nes has made public and information that comes from investigation at the Manitoba Securities Commission.

The Min ister has indicated that he saved $35,000; Securities Commission information would indicate that he saved $58,000, as well as an immed iate profit of $1 6,000.00. Which figure is true, and does the Premier not believe that it's necessary to ask his Mini ster that? HON. H. PAWLEY: The matters that are important insofar as the First Min ister of this province is concerned is Min isters' participation insofar as any action that is illegal or any action that would be in conflict of interest. Those are the two important parameters that are very, very important insofar as the adminis tration of any government.

I'm very pleased just to advise members because Ma ni tobans kn ow full well this Go vernment and members of this Government have not engaged in illegalities or conflict of interest. I am not going to delve into personal income tax returns as to whether or not this particular amount is correct or that particular amount is correct, Madam Speaker . lt is not a matter of responsibil ity of this Government as long as there is not a matter of illegalit y, nor a matter of conflict of interest, and I have not been informed of eith er, Madam Speaker . MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, is the Premier telling us that he isn't concerned that the integrit y and the credibil ity of his entire admin istration is at stake if his Minis ter will not tell the truth publicly ? Is he not concerned about that? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, my concern is only insofar as the Scientific Tax Credits are concerned, and the util ization by any member on this side of the Chamber is that honourable members who wish to impede the work of true national tax reform will lock onto those particular circumstances because they are not interested in reform, unfortuna tely, Ma dam Speaker.

They are only interested in tryi ng to frustrate true tax reform in this countr y, as wit nessed by the fact that in five years there never has been a question on tax reform from across the way until they can particularize a particular circu mstance, hoping to impede the cause of tax reform. MR. G. FILMON: Ma dam Speak er, the Federal Conservative Government . . . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition , I presume, on a new question. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G.

FILMON: Ma dam Sp eaker, the Federal Conservative Government stopped the hemorrhage of 10 dollars from the Liberal program that allo wed the Mini ster to bilk the taxpay er out of all of this money. The question at hand is: is the Premier not concerned that his Min isters tell the truth openly and honestly, publicly, so that the credibili ty and integrit y of his admin istration is not in question? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , let me indi cate to yo u that none of the Min isters on this side have ever intentionall y misled anyone in respect to their own affairs are concerned.

If there is a matter of calculation that is outside the parameters of this House, the Mi nister will deal with that in the appropria te way . Ins ofar as hemorrha ging, Ma dam Speaker, the honourable member refers to closure by the Federal Conservative Government regard ing scientific tax credits. I regret, Madam Speak er, that they al lowed a ten-fold hemorrhaging insofar as tax breaks in the 1984 Wilson tax document dealing with capital gains exemptions of $500,000-plus additional tax breaks to hig her-income groups in this country.

I will be delighted, Madam Speaker, not to deal, as the honourable member wishes to do, with gutter busine ss, but to deal with substantial issues pertaining to tax reform in this country and the need for greater fairness, greater equity insofar as the tax reforms, so that low and ordin ary Canadians everywhere can realize a proper and fair benefit. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, the truth can never be gutter business in this House or anywhere else in this province. Because the Premier seems to have dif ficu lty understand ing, I'll make the question sim ple.

If he believes that his Mini ster of Energy and Min es has told the truth, then tell us, did he save $35,000 on the NE RC'85 investment, or did he save $58,000.00? Which is the truth? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speak er, we appear to be reaching a point of repetition in the questions. The Honourable Min ister will deal, like any other member in this House, with the tax department in regard to his own particular tax figur es. If there are inaccuracies, he will deal with the appropriate people, that which is the tax department, just like the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, just like any other member in this House.

The dealings will be with the appropriate officials of the tax department as to the precise and exact figur es, Madam Speak er. No member on this side has any thing to hide. Honourable members across the way may or may not, but honourable members on this side of the House have nothing to hide. Madam Speaker , I note with interest the continued reluctance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition and, of course, all honourable colleagues across the way to discuss the real issues of tax reform in this countr y and the need to get on with tax reform in Canada. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker , I find it incredible that the Premier is not interested in the truth when it applies to his Min isters. I find it absolutely incredible. My next question to the Premier is: has any other member of his adminis tration, has any other member of his Government participated in such a tax seam, a

Friday, 9 May, 1986 tax avoidance scheme, such as the NERC or any other scientific research tax credit? HON. H. PAWLEY: Yes, Madam Speak er. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , will the Premier then be informing the public as to which other Min isters partici pated so that the public may be aware, or other members? HON. H. PAWLEY: I commend the Honourable Mi nister in question. As soon as I returned from business and a few da ys break, the Honourable Mini ster spoke to me. The Honourable Mi nister then commenced an init iative in order to ensure that the public be advised.

I gather that the public is al ready advised through a release earlier this morning. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, then I wonder if the Premier would be so kind as to announce it in this House if it has al ready been made public. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , it is not a matter of House busin ess. The Min ister has indicated to the public at large the fact that he partici pated in one of the tax credit situations that are the issue of some interest. I believe that release has been so circulated. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, I disa gree that it isn't a matter for this Hous e.

The former Min ister of Finance label ized these schemes "legalized theft." He referred to them as bilking the taxpay er of Manitoba; he made them a matter for debate in this forum in the past election; he made it a public issue that is relevant to this House, and I insist that the Premier make it public here if he has any courage at all. HON. H. PAWLEV: Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition conveniently ignores what the Min ister of Finance said at the time in question.

The Min ister of Finance ind icated - in fact, at the very press conference that is a frequent subject of comment - that these scientific tax credits were wrong, wrong, wrong in law; that these scientific tax credits ought to be abolished, should never have been established in the first instance. But the Minis ter of Finance of the da y said very clearly this: "I don't mean that in terms of people, the Manitobans who put this money into this.

I'm not critical of them, the tax system is what I am critical of." Right from Day One, Madam Speaker, the position of this Government, including the former Min ister of Finance, has been very, very clear; it is the law that's wrong. Madam Sp eake r, what I regret on th e part of honourable members across the way is, while they can pontificate and they can moral ize about indi viduals, when it comes to taking a sta nd, as honourable members have on this side of the Chamber , about Wilson tax breaks, about scientific tax credits, they hide, they cower, Madam Speaker.

But members on this side consistently, from Day One, have said they ought to be abolished, or that they ought not to have been initia ted in the first place. MR. G. FILMON: I can't believe the auda city of the Premier, talking about cowering and hiding and refusing 11 to answer this question, and tell us which of his colleagues is the gui lty party. I can't believe it.

Madam Speaker, my question to the Premier is: when the Min ister of Finance made his annou ncement during the election campa ign, accused people who partici pated in the scheme of legal theft, was he aware of the participation in such a scheme by any one of the members of his adminis tration? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, if the honourable member is asking whether I knew, the answer is no. I can't speak for the former Minis ter of Financ e.

Madam Speaker, when we talk about cower ing and courage, I credit the particular Min ister in question that he had the courage to immedia tely come forward and to - (Interjection) - indicate ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , in view of the fact that the Premier knew nothing about this participation in such an in vest ment, has he no gu idelines or requir ements on the part of the members of his adminis tration to inform him of participation in schemes and investments, and of any of their assets that might impin ge upon government polic y ?

HON. H. PAWLEY: What certainl y the honourable member is dealing with is very, very interesting indeed. Firstly, Madam Speak er, no illegalities; secondly, no conflict of interest. What the honourable member keeps referring to is a matter that does not involve conflict of interest.

Madam Speak er, I think what we need in this Chamber and what we need for consideration is an opening up of the confl ict-of-interest provisions, so that we don't have individual kind of nickel-and-d iming as honourable members are wont to do in this House; th at every thing is open so that the public and honourable members can see exactly what each and every honourable member on each side of the House has by way of assets so we don't get into this kind of character muckraking, wallowing in the mud as the Honourable Leader of the Opposition is bound to do. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, if the Premier truly wants openness, why won't he begin by telling us the name of the other Min ister who participated? That's what's needed here is for him to set an example, to show some leadership. Ma dam Spea ker, my only qu estion about his suggestion as to what needs to come forward in terms of legislation for conflict of interest and openness is will it make the Min ister of Energy and Mines an honest man? HON. H.

PAWLEV: Ma dam Speaker , I wo uld ask whether that was a proper question and whether it is proper in this Chamber to impute dishone sty to any member of this Chamber . lt is my view that it is cont rary to the Rules of Order. lt is my view that the Leader of the Opposition should withd raw that comment which im putes very, very fal sely upon a member of this Chamber and totall y baseless and unfortuna tely again a repetition of us wallowing in the mud that I referred to a few seconds ago.

Friday, 9 May, 1986 MADAM SPEAKER: I'd like to draw the attention of members to Beauchesne, Rule 359(6). "A question must be within the admin istr ative com petence of the Government." lt seems to me we are dealing with private financial matters of a member. - (Interjection) - Also I would like to draw - (Interjection) - Order please. Also I would like to draw attention of the mem bers to Beauchesne, 316 which sa ys that a question should not make inferences or allegations, imp ute motives, reflect upon members or upon decisions made by the House or cast aspersions upon persons within the House or outside of it.

The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. CO WAN: On a point of order, Madam Speak er, as yo u very clearly indi cate, the purpose of the question period and the purpose of the question is not to impugn motives or reflect upon the character of any member of this House. We have an incident where the Leader of the Opposition has very clearly done so.

I would ask for the Leader of the Opposition in his role as an honourable member of this House to stand up and to withdraw those comments which are in opposition to what is provided for in Beauchesne as yo u have listed, and other citations in Beauchesne as well, and very clearly impugn motives on a member of this House and I would ask that he withdraw that. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Spea ker, if anything that I have said is in contravention of the rules of this House I will withdr aw that.

Madam Speak er, I say to yo u that the comments that 1 have made have flowed from the inabilit y of the Fi rst Mini ster to answer my direct question as to whether or not the information which the Minis ter of Energy and Mines has made public in a statement with respect to tax saving is true or whether the information that has been provided th rough in ves tigation at the Manitoba Securities Commission is true. Until that cloud is removed from the head of the Min ister of Energy and Mines, nothing I could say would exaggerate any in way the question of truthfulness and integri ty that lies in his face.

Employment, Summer - students MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Me mber for Elmwood. MR. J. MALOWAY: Thank yo u, Madam Speak er. My qu estion is to the Min ister of Emplo y ment Services. In light of the fact that most university students are presently finished their classes and that high school students will be joining them shortly, could the Mi nister outline what plans his deparment has to provide summer employment for these yo ung people? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Opposition House Leader. MR. G.

MERCIER: Thank you, Madam Sp eaker , I rise on a point of order. 12 lt has been the tradition in this House that question period is prima rily a time for questions from the members of the Opposition. Certainl y from time to time ther e will be qu estions from mem bers on the Government side. This is the first Session of the Legislature. Only the Leader of the Opposition had an opportuni ty to ask questions. I know the Member for River Heights and the Member for Ste. Rose were both standing and in their seats when you chose to recognize the member of the Government benches.

I therefore move, Madam Speaker, seconded by the Mem ber for Sturgeon Creek, that the Mem ber for River Heights be now heard. MADAM SPEAKER: As the Honourable Government House Leader is well aware, one cannot move a motion on a point of order. I recognized the Member for Elmwood who stood sometime ago. I recognized him once al ready - that was interrupted. I also have seen both the other two members that have stood and they will be calle d immedi ately after the Me mber for Elmwood has an answer to his question. The Honourable Mi nister of Employment Services. HON. L. EVANS: Thank yo u, Madam Speaker.

I can advise the honourable member that it is the intention of our department and our Government to maintain a high level of employment programs for the yo ung people of this provi nc e this sum mer, and particu larly for univ ersity, college and high school graduates. Our spending is in the order of $8.5 milli on, provi ding jobs for between 5,000 and 6,000 yo ung people under the program called Careerstart. In addition, we are maintaining the STEP Program which is a Summer Temporar y Employment Program which is - (Interjection) - which will also provide 900 jobs.

So I would say that we are taking initia tives in answer to the question what we are doing this summer - we are maintaining full scale, top level programs to help our yo ung people. Regrettably, I must observe the Federal Government has decreased its funding for yo ung people by $1 .72 million this summer and I think that is very, very regrettable. Flooding - Ste. Rose MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Madam Speaker, I have a question for the Mi nister of Natural Resources. In view of the fact that there are major flooding problems in the village and the surrounding area of Ste.

Rose, I wonder if he would ind icate what he intends to do immedia tely to help support the people of this town and surrounding area who have suffered so much from what has become a sadly common occurrence. MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourabl e Min ister of Natural Resources. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Thank yo u Madam Speaker. I am aware of the situation of flooding in Ste. Rose and, indeed, the Riding Mountain area. There is an

Friday, 9 May, 1986 agreement that has been negotiated between the Federal and Provincial Governments and the Turtle River Conservation District to put in place flood control measures for the area. The timimg of that will be that some construction will hopefully take place during 1986. They 're in the process of land acquisition at this time. In terms of the immediate situation that the people are facing, certainly all of the resources of the Department of Natural Resources will be made available to the people of the area to cope with that difficult situation. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: A supplementary, Madam Speaker, to the same Minister. Will he be declaring the village and that surrounding area a disaster area? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Madam Speaker, to the same Minister, will he be declaring the village and that surrounding area a disaster area? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Highways. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker , the process that is in place when emergencies , such as flooding, occur has been established through the disaster assistance guidelines that have been established by this Government.

Of course , the EMO officials are aware, the Emergency Measures officials are aware of what is happening . They 're assisting, in terms of the provincial response, initial responses from the municipal government, as the member is probably aware. Once the damages have been assessed, both private and public damages, and the reports have been received , the Disaster Assistance Board will consider them and forward them to myself in Cabinet, and consideration will then be made as to the compensation that would be paid for individuals and municipalities affected .

The guidelines are very clear, the cost formula, sharing formula, is there. This has been established by us and will be implemented if the situation warrants it and the guidelines apply. MR. G. CUMMINGS: A supplementary , Madam Speaker, to the Minister of Natural Resources. Can the people of Ste . Rose have the assurance that every effort will be bent by his department to obtain flood control and facilitate the building of the ring dike immediately ? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources . HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, I think the commitment of the Provincial Government is clear .

We've entered into an agreement with the Federal Government and the Turtle River Conservation District, and it is certain ly our intention to honour our commitment under that agreement. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights . 13 Crescentwood property owners - return of caveats MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you , Madam Speaker. My question is to the Honourable Attorney-General. Madam, on July 10 of 1985,

An Act to Amend The Real Property Act was passed by this House, with the full agreement, I might say, of both sides. Unfortunately, in the process , it managed to damage severely the property rights of hundreds of my constituents. Is this Government at the present moment considering introducing legislation that will return the Enderton caveats and thereby protect the property owners of Crescentwood? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R.

PENNER: Amendments to The Real Property Act are under consideration and will be considered by my department more fully in subsequent weeks and by caucus and I will be in a position to announce details of those amendments in due course. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker, a supplementary question . The Honourable Attorney-General has said he's going to consider . I want to know if the property owners of my district are in fact going to get relief? HON. R.

PENNER: I note that the property owner is covered by the Enderton caveat - and it's not only the Enderton caveat - but many other caveats that were effected by the legisltation - concurred in incidentally , not only by members of both sides, but by the City of Winnipeg - have sought . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. R. PENNER: The Member for St. Norbert hasn't changed his behaviour from one Session to another. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. If the member has a question he can ask his question when the Minister finishes. HON. R.

PENNER: I note that in accordance with what everybody assumed to be the proper course at the time , rightly or wrongly, but everybody assumed to be the proper course , the affected property owners in that particular area have sought and indeed are obtaining improvements to the zoning by-laws of the City of Winnipeg.

Members may recall that it was the thought that rather than rely on caveats which were put in place at the turn of the century and reflected the needs of that time, that the prevalent and prevailing zoning by-laws of a municipality - and in this case, of the City of Winnipeg - ought to be the first recourse for protection of front yard, inside yard alignments, usage and things of that kind . I'm happy to know that indeed the requests of members of that particular community are being met

- Friday, 9 May, 1986 by the City of Winnipeg. This is not to say that we won't consider what, if anything, can be done through The Real Property Act. I'm not in a position to make an announcement of that char acter in this House today. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: A final supplementary. Attorney­ General, yo u have in fact ind icated that the City of Winni peg has made a mistake and they are rectifying it. That does not remove, however, the responsibilit y of this Government to return those caveats to the people, and I think they should be done and I hope yo u will take it under advisement immedia tely.

MADAM SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank yo u, Madam Speaker . A question to the Attorney-General on the same matter raised by the Member for River Heights. Will the Attorney-General not acknowledge, as Hansard will confirm, that when he raised his legislation late in the last Session that he, in response to questions, confirmed that he had reviewed this matter with the City of Winni peg and other authorities and that no adverse effects would flow from the legislation that he propo sed and passed in this House? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R.

PENNER: Yes, that substantially is on the record and I obviously am not going to qua rrel with the record , th at would be an in tere sting way of beginning the Session; but, Madam Speak er, in tact, there are no adverse effects which have, to this date, flowed from that decision. That is the poi nt. The Crescentwood property owners, some of them, fear that some new types of development might come in on the heels of that decision effecting the character of the neighbourhood; that has not happe ned.

I remain confident today, as I was confident at the time I made that statement in the House, that will continue to be the case.

However, because these people - and people, Ma dam Speak er, in yo ur own constituency, some of them - are concerned, not I think being fully aware of the scope of urban zoning by-la ws, we are, as I've said at the beginning of this series of questions, looking at the decision and looking at the possibility of amendments to The Real Property Act, should it be the case that the zoning by-la ws are insufficient to protect property owners in retaining the essential character of their neighbourhood. Farmers - assistance to MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Vir den. MR. G. FIND LAY: Thank yo u, Madam Speaker .

I would like to address my question to the Mi nister of Agriculture. There have been some 230 bankruptcies or more in Manitoba over the last four years and the financial crisis is certainly getting worse. Bankruptcies are only the tip of the iceberg, as many farmers have voluntaril y left the industry and many others have wound down their operations by selling off some assets. 14 The Federal Government has recently annou nced substantial plans to support the farmers of Western Canada.

The governments of the Pro vinc es of Saskatche wan and Alberta have also annou nced substantial plans to support their farmers in their province. I ask the Minis ter, on behalf of the farmers of Mani toba, what plans he has, what immediate plans he has, to support the incomes of the farmers, the grain farmers in particu lar, of Manitoba, all grain farmers of Manitoba, to put the crop in tor 19 86 and harvest it? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Ma dam Speak er, I thank the honourable member opposite for the question .

I'm very pleased that members as well recognize, and I'm sure because of the added wet weather that we're experiencing in our province, that it will in fact in a number of regions make circumstan ces a bit more uncertain in terms of how soon crops can be put in. Madam Speak er, this Government has put more money into agriculture than any government in the history of this province. Having said that, we recognize that no matter how much money we put into agriculture during this difficult period, it will not be enough. it's been recognized by members of the farm communit y across this nation.

In fact, in a recent meeting with the Prime Min ister of this country, that the difficulties being experienced by the grain industry, no matter what the Federal Government might do - and they didn't even encourage, quite frankl y as we have done, to maintain the initial prices of wheat and to lessen the pressure on the farm commun ity that is now being experienced because of the downg rad ing of wheat pric es by anywhere from 19 percent to 24 percent as was announced several weeks ago.

Our Premier this week, in fact on Monda y, met with the Federal Mini ster of Agriculture to discuss a certain number of options and considerations that the Federal Government should be putting into pla ce. We will continue, Madam, maintaining our Loan Guar antee Program which has exceeded $1 00 mil lion - (I nterje ction) - Ma dam Speake r, this provi nce pione ered most of the innovations in loan guarant ees in the whole area of debtor-creditor arrangements and adjustments.

We will be moving with commitments that we made during the election this Session, and there will be other anno uncements made in due course, Madam Sp eaker, to assist the farming communit y. We are now as well reviewing whether or not . . . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. G. FINDLAY: Madam Speak er, a supplementary. In the area of loan guar antees, I see the Province of Saskatchewan has put out money to the tune of $25 a cult ivated acre at 6 percent for all farmers in the Province of Saskatchewan. I am asking the Mini ster if he's prepared to move in that direction. HON. B.

URUSKI: Madam Speak er, that would be a polic y consi dera tion, and we will make tho se announc ements if we will be considering that kind of movement.

Friday, 9 May, 1986 Madam Speaker, I want to tell the honourable member that ... SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Ord er please. HON. B. URUSKI: . . . that a broad policy of that nature, I would not accept. I would not accept , Madam Speaker, because it's been widely - and that is why governments in the past have been clearly criticized - that regard less of the need in the community, those monies were made available.

In fact, we were advised just recently that there are people in the farm community have taken that money, and gladly - I would at 6 percent take that money - put it into a financial institution and reinvest it for 9 percent and 10 percent. Would that be considered illegal by the honourable members opposite if that was done? That would not be the kind of policy we would want to pursue, but we will be pursuing policies to , in fact, assist farmers who are hard-pressed, and our programming will be and will continue to ref lect that kind of policy, Madam Speaker . MR . G.

FINDLAY: Madam Sp eaker, as a further supplemen tary, I would remind the Minister of the absolute urgency of this situation , and the input costs are really the problem at the farm level. Is he prepared to reduce education costs for farmers, taxes on farml and ? HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, I want to tell you that the problem is both input and income . It's not just on one side. Madam Speaker, we were the first Government in this country to ask for a national inquiry into the prices of chemicals.

We believe that the farm community in Manitoba alone has overpaid between $25 million to $40 million a year in the costs of chemicals . Madam Speaker , actions taken by our Minister of Finance to open the borders in competition on fuel prices has resulted in reduction of fuel measures. During the election, we made a commitment to change the method by which the tax forgivene ss that the province provides will be changed. Those measures will be brought in this Sessio n, Madam Speaker. Those are the kinds of measures we are taking to im pac t on the input costs.

We believe, as well, that oil prices should in fact be reduced below their present level , Madam Speaker , but I haven 't heard any members opposite saying to their federal counterparts, force the oil companies to lower their prices to the farm community right across this country. They haven't raised that matter at all. Anstett, Andy - conditions of contract MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert . MR. G. MERCIER: A question to the First Minister , Madam Speaker.

Could he inform the House whether , in addition to the $55,000 to be paid to the former Membe r for Springfield on a contract with the 15 Government, will he also be paid expenses? Will he be provided with a car? Will he be provided with office and secretarial space? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I believe the co ntract with Mr. Anstett is a public document. I will certainly forward a copy of that to the member . It does not include vehic le expenses or secretary or that sort of thing. MR. G.

MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I take that as an undertaking then that the copy of the contract will be tabled in the Legislature within a reasonable time. My supplementary question then , Madam Speaker, is to the Premier.

Could he expla in to the House and justify to the House how he and his Government have developed their priorities whereby they have created a make-work expensive position for a defeated member of their party for work that could easily be done by exi sting staff members and at the same time eliminate 200 Civil Ser vi ce positions, including six home economists who assist low-income fam ilies, single parents, rural families in difficulty? Can he justify establishing that priority in favour of his defeated members of his party, and elim inating these services for needy families?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: As the Membe r for St. Norbert was uttering his comments , I couldn' t help but think that honourable members, if they had wished, could have sunk to the same level and questioned the engagement of a former member of this House , a former defeated Conservative candidate , a former Member for Fort Garry, as a high-priced consultant to the Conservative Government in Ottawa . My recollection is that honourable members in this House recognized that that honourable member would be able to provide valuable inpu t.

Unlike honourable members across the way, Madam Speaker, we make no apologies for ensuring that we can utilize the talent made available to us in order to achieve our priorities as a government. Our first and foremost job is the improvement of the economy and ensuring, Madam Speaker, that . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Orde r. HON. H. PAWLEY: ...

Man itobans are given greater opportunity ; secondly , the farms and the rural communities of this province; thirdly, to ensure there is greater fairness and equity within our society; and fourth, ensuring that Manitoba's position is made clear, made known fully, whether inte r-go vernme ntally and within the Province of Manitoba, standing up on behalf of Manitobans . The former Member for Springfie ld, being a very talented and skilful member, I must say, one of the most skilful members who has ever sat in this Chamber ,

- - Friday, 9 May, 1986 Madam Speaker, brings with him invaluable talents to co ntri bute to tha t seco nd area of prior ity th at I mentioned a few moments ago , the im provement of the rural co mmun ities by way of his work that he will be participating in in sofar as developing the fund fo r rural ec on omic develo pment. I am pleased; most Manitobans are pleased, except for the political partisan supporters of the party across the way , that we have the value in the former Member of Springfield to provide his input on behalf of Mani tobans. MR. G.

MERCIER: Madam Speak er, the First Min ister referred to the app ointment of the fo rmer Member for Fort Garry, Mr. Sherman, but that was to an existing commission in a field in which he had been employed in the private sector.

Madam Speak er, I ask the First Minis ter, in view of the fact that he made this promise for this type of work during the electio n, when ob viously he recogn ized there were peo ple within the Civil Service who co uld carry out this type of wo rk, is it more important to him to create a job fo r a defeated member of his party than to retain the services of people in the Home Economics Department who provide services to single parents, low-income families, rural families in difficulties? Is his priority to look after his defeated Cabinet Min isters, rather than help the needy people of Manitoba? HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speak er, the Mini ster of Agriculture will speak to the issue of home econom ists, but I wo uld like to correct some of the comments by the Member for St. Norbert. First and foremost, the fo rmer Member for Fort Garr y was not involv ed in filling a particular position left vacant, he was involv ed in consultatio n, co ntracts I understand, involving the privatization of the health care system, both on behalf of the Conservative Government, either on behalf of the Conservative Government in Ottawa and/or also the Conservative Government in the Province of Saskatchewan. We made no issue of that.

We did not, Madam Speaker, wallow in the mud there, as honoura ble members are doing now, insofar as the app oi ntment of Waiter Weir to head the co mmission in regard to assessment in the Province of Manitoba. We thought, in fact, he might do not too bad a job. We did not hesitate, Madam Speak er, to ensure that we had the services of a member like the former Member for Springfield to co ntribute to a very important priority of this Government. The Min ister of Agriculture will deal with the home econ om ists part of the question.

Silviculture Program - lay offs MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber fo r Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Madam Speaker . My question is to the Minis ter of Natural Reso urces. In view of the co mments made by the Premier here today, on Mon day of this week, 22 people in the southeast were hired for a 20-week period under the Silviculture Program, and on Tuesday they received a two-week layoff notice already. I wonder if the Mini ster 16 of Na tur al Resources can expl ain, in view of his Premier's comments, why that happened. MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourabl e Mi nister of Natural Resour ces. HON. L.

HARAPIAK: I will take that as notice. Thank you. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Qu estio n period having expired, I wo uld like to draw the attention of members to the gall ery where we have 40 students of Grade 9 from the Whitemouth Collegiate, under the direction of Mr. Steinhoff. The school is located in the co nstitue ncy of the Honourable Member for Springfield. On behalf of all members, I would welcome you here this morning. ORDERS OF THE DAY MATTER OF PRIVILEGE MR. J. WALDING: Madam Speak er, I have a matter of privilege I wanted to bring before the House.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Vital on a matter of privilege. MR. J. WALDING: My matter of privilege involves not only me, but reflects on the House itself. I intend to co nclude my remarks with a motion enabling the House to make remedy in this particular case. When raising a matter of privilege, it is necessary to show that the matter is raised at the first available opp ortun ity and, secon dly, that there is prima facie evidence of a breach of privilege having taken place.

You will find there is precedent, as recently as the last Sessio n, for a matter of privilege having been raised on the first wo rking day, and that is the day after the official opening day. As far as prima facie evidence is concerned, I submit a copy of a newspaper

article in which the words referred to will be found in print which, I think, constitutes the necessary prima facie evidence. lt was on April 16 th of this year that the Free Press carried a co lumn under the name and heading of one Frances Russell which refers to me as an MLA, and uses the words, "blackmail and extortio n," which, as members are aware, are both criminal offences. I find those words offensive; they are libellous; they are defam atory and they reflect on the House and on me as a Member of the Legislature. This Mrs.

Russell is not a junior or a new reporter, she is a very experienced co lumnist who should know better, and not use libellous statements in her co lumns. I don't think that she can hide behind a quotation from some unnamed third party, which she does, in quoting that other person as using those wo rds. She must surely take responsibil ity for her use of those words in print. The managing edit o r of the Free Press is one Murray Burt, and he is responsible, I understand, for the contents of the newspaper, and surely must have condoned the inclusion of that particular article. He is just as guilty of libel as Mrs.

Russell is.

Friday, 9 May, 1986 The Free Press, as you know, used to be a reputable newspaper with a good reputation right across the countr y. lt has sunk to a new low of yellow journalism when it prints in its paper libels against MLA's which amounts to a contempt of this House in printing that sort of thing. Members should bear in mind that if a journalist can get away with making accusa tions of a criminal offence against one member, then any journalist can make any allegation of criminal offence agains t any members and, indeed, against all of the House. MR. D. ORCHARD: it's called fair comment, eh, Howard? MR. J.

WALDING: My friend from across the way mentions "fair comment," and fair comment I will accept, but the operative word there is "fair" and I don't consider it fair in any way to accuse someone of a criminal offence, as has occurred in this particular case. In order that the House might do something about the matter , I move, seconded by the Hon ourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, THAT the matter of the Frances Russell column in the Free Press of April 16 th, 19 86, be referred to the Comm ittee on Privi leges and Elections. I table a copy of the offending article.

MADAM SPEAKER: Under Rule No. 30, I may permit other members of the House to make limi ted and strictly relevant debate concerning the member's motion of privilege. The Honourable Opposition House Leader. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Spea ker, may I ask a question first? Was a copy of the newspaper

article tabled? If so, could I have a copy? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Well, Madam Speaker , first of al l, obviously this is a matter that is being raised without any advance notice, certainly to members of this side of the House, and therefore perhaps much of what I say are my own personal opinions. The paragraph in question refers to it, as several top Government officials put it, the Premier would not and could not submit to "blackmail and extortion. " lt seems to me the first point I would raise, and I would hope the Member for St.

Vital would raise it within his caucus. This eligibili ty is a quo tation from a Government source, from either a member of caucus or a member of the Premier's Office and is a matter that should be raised with them. 1t is not, in my view, an opinion that is being expressed by the writer of this column that the member has been guilty of blackmail and extortion.

Further, it is my view, in my experience where there have been newspaper articles that are, let us say, defamatory of ind ividuals, either in their personal or elected capacity - but I am familiar with a number of instances where comments have been made that are allegedly defamatory of individuals in their elected 17 capacity - that there are remedies for that and the remedies are to sue for defamation in a private way; and that is being done in many cases and members of the Government are particularly familiar with suits for defama tion, and might be able to guide the Member for St.

Vital in those types of actions as a result of their recent experiences. Madam Speaker, Beauchesne does point out on Page 19, in Citation 51, that "lt is always the responsibility of the House to decide if reflections on members are sufficiently serious to justify ac tio n." In 1974, and again in 1976, members complained about newspaper reports and the Speaker allo wed that a prima facie case of privilege existed. After debate the House declined to refer the matter to the Standing Commit tee on Privi leges and Elections.

I make no comment, Madam Speaker , on whether or not you wish to rule that a prima facie case of privilege existed, but if the purpose of the referral is to refer the matter to the Privileges and Elections Commi ttee to subpeona one Frances Russell, to have her inform the members of the committee as to who these Government officials are - in the Premier's Office or members of his caucus - who allegedly accused him of blackmail and extortion, I'm not particularly sure that we on this side of the House would want to be a part of that type of a process.

I would say, and I want to say, Madam Spe aker, I have great respect for the integrity of the Member for St. Vital, I have great respect for that and he's always conduc ted himself honourably in this House. No doubt that's why he finds himself on the backbench, Ma dam Speak er, but I want him to take these comments in that regard because I do respect him and I know members on this side respect him very much; but I am saying I have reservations about the process here. The process is one that I think, fi rstly, he should consider a personal claim for defamation with his personal solicit or.

Secondly , he should consider having dis cussions with the Premier whose Government officials, they are his officials, who accuse the Member for St. Vital of blackmail or extortion or discussions with his fellow members of caucus with whom he has chosen to join who may have referred to him in these tones. I do not personally support a referral to the Commit tee on Privi leges and Elections to summon a reporter to attempt to gain information as to who these people were.

Certainly we're all aware that in reporting of the actions of elected representatives, words are used like "blackmail and extortion," if they were Frances Russell's comments, but they're used in the general, cynical attitude that people have of politicians, unfortu nately, and I don't think particularly she would accuse someone of a criminal offence of blackmail and extortion. Those are my remarks and I hope they're somehow helpful, but without notice, Madam Speaker, those are the thoughts I wanted to place on the record with respect to this matter. MADAM SPEAKER: Thank you.

A matter of privilege The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Perhaps, Madam Speak er, I might be allowed a few moments on this particular matter of privilege.

.. Friday, 9 May, 1986 As you are aware, the requirement for the matter of privilege to be brought up is (1) that it is brought up at the earliest possi ble moment, and the Member for St. Vital has correctly identified that there is precedent for bringing up matters of privilege of this nature on this particular da y, the first working day of the Legislature. So I think he has in fact followed the proper procedure in that regard.

As the Honourable House Leader for the Opposition has indicated, it is up to the House to determine, according to Page 19 in Citation 51, "If reflections on Members of the House are serious enough to just ify action." And the course of action which the Member for St. Vital has indi cated as being the preferred course of action through his motion, that is a reference to the appropria te committee, is one which the House should in fact have the ability to decide upon.

There is reference and there is precedent in respect to sending to the House, to the committee, questions regard ing newspaper articles and report ing of newspaper articles - the Honourable House Leader of the Opposition will recall that he had been involved in one such incident where they were in fact government where a newspaper

article reflected upon servants of the House and was sent to the Com mittee on Privi leges and Elections for clarifica tion. Gi ven that precedent, although it does not apply di rectly to this particular situation, does exist, you, Madam Speak er, if I may offer some advice, may wish to take this under advisement, review the existing precedents as to how they might apply to this particular situation. There is of course precedent for taking matters of privilege under advisement by the Speaker and report back to the House so that we can review this situation at that time.

MADAM SPEAKER: A matter of privilege is a very serious situation and I would like to take the matter under advisement and report back. Orders of the Day. The Honourable Opposition Leader. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, before Orders of the Day, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Pembina, that under Rule 27 the ordinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public im portance; namely , the failure of the Premier to demand the resignation of the Minis ter of Energy and Mines following his admission that he participated in a quick profit tax seam for the taxation years 1984 and 1985. MADAM SPEAKER: I have received proper notice from the member that he intended to make this motion.

Under Rule 27(2) the member has five minut es to explain the urgency of debate accord ing to Beauchesne 287. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , in addressing the urgency of debating this particular motion at this imm edia te time, I begin by saying that given the responses today in question period, given the last two or three weeks of discussion in the media, it is absolutely fair to say that the credi bility of this entire admin istration is in qu estion. In fact, th e in tegrity of the ND P 18 adminis tration of this Province of Manitoba is in doubt at this point in time.

The dis crepancy which the First Mini ster was unable to or refused to addr ess toda y with respect to information given publicly by the Mini ster of Energy and Mines and the information avai lable from the Manitoba Securities Commission casts a shadow of doubt over every member of this admin istration. Indeed, each and every person sitting on that side of the House today is living in a world in which their honesty, their integr ity, their truthfulness has been put into question by one member of their adminis tration.

Having said that, Madam Speak er, I am quickly brought to the realization that in the course of question period, of course, we became aware that there is indeed a second member of this admin istration who has cast similar question and doubt on the integrity and the honesty of the people sitting on that side of the House. I have been given, as we sat here over the past half hour, a copy of the letter which was sent to the First Min ister by the Min ister of Environment, Workpla ce Safety and Health.

Indeed, it raises even more urgency to the question of a deba te and an urgent debate with respect to the suitability and the approp riateness of Minis ters who have partici pated in the SRTC remaining in the Cabinet of this Government. Ma da m Speaker, th ere are mor e and mo re unans wered questions coming up by the moment.

Indeed, some of the answers that the Premier gave today pla ce even greater urgency on it, any thing possible to remove the shadow of doubt over all of the members of this adminis tration in terms of integrit y, in terms of truthfulness and in terms of their ability to carry out the very commitments that have been given to the people of Manitoba by this adminis tration, not only yesterday in the Throne Speech but as we led up to this point in time.

Madam Sp eaker, as we embark upon the Sessi on, the matter has to be dealt with immedia tely because potentially Min isters of this Crown will be entering into, on behalf of the people of Manitoba, serious financial commit ments, serious contr act ual obl igations, multimillion dollar ventures with respect to energy sales, with respect to potash developments, all sorts of things that have been referred to in the public domain cannot be proceeded with in my view until this matter is dealt with.

Because the people of this province are aski ng, and legiti mately so, whether or not they can trust either a Min ister or indeed an entire admin istration with handling these major commitments without knowing whether or not they are acting in self-interest, whether that be political self-interest or financial self-interest, or whether they are keeping in mind at all tim es the best interests of the people of Manitoba. So not one decision can be entered into, no t one matter of im portance can be proceeded with, until we take this matter into public deba te and attention right here and now, Madam Speak er.

These matters must be dealt with. Madam Speak er, further, in terms of urgency, the Premier has ind icated only this morning that he intends to make the matter of taxation reform a topic of discussion later this month in Swan River at the Western Premiers' meeting. Now, Madam Speak er, in my view we cannot have that take place with any confidence, with any credibili ty, that position being taken by the

Friday, 9 May, 1986 Premier on behalf of this adminis tration cannot be put forward as long as we permit him to keep in his Cabinet people who say do as I say but not as I do; people who say we must reform taxat ion, we must look after the needs of the poor people of this province and we must look after them through a fair taxation process, but just a second until I get at the trough and then we can do our work. We cannot have that. it's urgent that we deal with it now.

Madam Sp eaker, the third point that I make with respect to urgency is that the former Minis ter of Finance, now the Mini ster of Industry, Trade and Techno lgy, labeli zed this particular scheme that the Mini ster of Energy participated in as legal ized theft. We cannot allow decisions to be made by a thief in Cabinet. That is the situation, Madam Speaker , that we are faced with in the words of his own colleague, a thief. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speak er, first, I would ask you r advice.

I bel ieve I heard the Lead er of the Opposition correctly when he said, or made reference to, a thief in Cabinet. This is the second time on this occasion, this opening working day of the Legislature, that he has imputed motives of that sort. I believe, Madam Speaker , that if that is the type of tone, the type of gutters niping, the type of muckraking, the type of imp utations that they want to make on the character of members opposite is going to make it a very difficult Session for all of us.

I would ask for the Leader of the Opposition to do as he did previously in the day and withd raw those remarks which very clearly impugn upon the character of a member of this House. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, I will correct my remarks to simply reflect what was said by the Minis ter of Energy and Mine s' colleague, the former Min ister of Finance, who label ized those who participated in this seam as having partici pated in legal ized theft.

Madam Speaker , I will rest that on the record and say that anyone who has participa ted in legal ized theft, as it was described by the Min ister of Industry, Trade and Techno log y, ought not to sit in Cabinet and make important decisions. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Minis ter of Industry, Trade and Technol ogy. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Madam Speak er, on a question of a matter of privilege. The Leader of the Opposition - (Interjection) - I will have a motion, I'll do it on a point of order. The Leader of the Opposition . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Excuse me.

Are you speaking on a matter of privilege or on a point of order? HON. V. SCHROEDER: On a point of order, Madam Speaker . MADAM SPEAKER: On a point of order? HON. V. SCHRO EDER: The Leader of the Opposition has been mi slead ing this House as to what I said to the people of Manitoba . . . 19 SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON. V. SCHROEDER: . . . and I believe that it is appropriate to set the record straight. I have a copy of the transcript of specifically what I said. MADAM SPEAKER: Was the Honourable Mi nister clarifying a statement that he made? I'm sorry, I was having problems hearing. HON. V.

SCHROEDER: I misspoke. I said the Leader of the Opposition was misleading the House. What I should have said was that he was incorrect, misi nformed as usual, in terms of what specifically it was that I had said. He stood up in this House and said that I had labelled ... MADAM SPEAKER: Point of order, clarification of a dis pute between two members is not a point of order. The Honourable Minis ter of Industry, Trade and Technology on a point of order. HON. V. SCHROEDER: On the motion . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. On the point of order, what is your point of order? HON. V.

SCHROEDER: On the point of order, I would like, Madam Speaker , to read . . . there is a point of order before the House. On that point of order ... MADAM SPEAKER: There is no point of order before the House. Are you raising a point of order? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Our House Leader rai sed a point of order. On that point of order . . . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader asked the Honourable Leader of the Opposition to withdraw some statements that he had made. In my opinion, the Leader of the Opposition did withd raw those statements.

On the motion of a matter of urgent public im portance, the Honour able Government House Leader has two minutes left in his five-minute remarks, and there are only two members that are allowed to have the five-minute opportunity to add ress whether this motion is in order because it is a matter of public urgency. The Honourable Government House Leader with two minu tes. HON. J. COWAN: lt will not take more than two min utes to very clearly identify why it is this matter is out of order.

The matter before us is not as to the urgency of the matter itself and, without accepting any of the premises that the Leader of the Opposition presented in respect to why he would wish to discuss this particular matter at this time, it is certainly not a matter that is of such urgency that the business of the House should be set aside. Madam Speaker is well aware of the precedents, as is the Leader of the Opposition, and I'm some what surprised that he would bring this motion forward in this way because, in fact, similar motions have been ruled out of order on almo st all occasions when we

I - Friday, 9 May, 1986 were involv ed in the type of debate which we are involved in during this particular portion of the House, that is, the Throne Speech. As a matter of fact, had he taken the time to consult with his House Leader he would have found out that his House Leader, on numerous occasions when these matters were brought before the House, ind icated very clearly that because there is another period of time set aside for the business of the House during which these matters can be debated, this matter of urgency is out of order from that respect alone.

There is an issue at hand, and that is the issue of tax reform. I would be, as would all members on this side as my Leader has ind icated, interested in hearing what members of the opposition have to say now, after many long years of silence, in respect to tax reform. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. HON. J. COWAN: They will have that opportunity to stand in their pla ce and put on the record very clearly , as they have had the opportunity for years previous and never taken it, to identify where it is they stand on that imp ortant position.

If, in fact, they believe that the issues which they have identified, which are not the real issues at hand here - the real issue is a tax system which must meet the need of government to raise money in a fair and equitable way - they will have that opportunity to do so during the Throne Spe ech Debate which is going to take place for several days now. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please.

Accord ing to Beauchesne 287 and 286, a matter of urgency " ... does not apply to the matter itself, but means 'urgenc y of deba te' , when the ord ina ry opportunities provided by the Rules of the House do not permit the subject to be brought on early enough and public int erest demands that discussion take place immedia tely." I fail to be persuaded of the urgency of deba te, based on both Beauchesne 286 and 287. Ther e is an immed iate opportunity with the Orders of the Day today on the debate of the motion for an add ress in reply to discuss far-ra nging matters.

Therefore, I rule that the motion is out of order. The Honourable Opposition House Leader. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I must, with due respect, challenge the ruling of the Chair . MADAM SPEAKER: I have ruled that the motion is out of order. My ruling has been challenged. Shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained? All those in favour, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. I rule that the ayes have it. MR. G. MERCIER: Yeas and nays, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the members. The question before the House is shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained?

A STANDING VOTE was taken, the result being as follows: 20 YEAS Ashton, Baker , Bucklasch uk, Carstairs, Cowan, Desjard ins, Doer, Dolin, Evans, L Harapiak, H. Harapiak, Harp er, Hemphill, Kostyra, Lecuyer, Mackling, Mal oway, Parasiuk, Pawley, Penner, Plohman, Santos, Schroeder, Scott, M. Smith, H. Smith, Storie, Uruski, Wal ding, Was ylycia-Leis. NAYS Birt, Slake, Brown, Canne ry, Cummings, Derkach, Downey, Driedger, Ducharme, Enns, Ernst, Filmon, Find la y, Ha mmond , Johnston, Kovnats, Man ness, Mc Crae, Merci er, Mi tchelson, Nordman, Oleson, Orchard, Pankr atz, Rocan, Roch. MR. CLERK, W.

Remnant: Yeas, 30; Nays, 26. MADAM SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried. THRONE SPEECH DEBATE MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Ell ice. MR. H. SMIT H: I move, seconded by the Member for Kildonan THA T an humbl e add ress be presented to the Hono urable Admin istrator of the Government of the Provir"]Ce of Manitoba as follows: We,· Her Majesty's dutiful and loyal su bjects of the Leg is lativ e Ass embly of Mani toba, in Session assem bled, humbly thank Your Honour for the gracious speech which Your Honour has been pleased to add ress at the opening of the present Session. MOTION presented and carried.

MR. H. SMIT H: Madam Speaker , I would like to offer you my congratulations on being elected to the highest office in this Assembly. You have the responsibi lity of preser ving order in this Cham ber and, with that responsibil ity, I know you will excel. You can only do it by gaining the respect of all of us in this Cham ber, and that you will do by being fair and impartial in your rulings, and by upholding the great traditions of this Assembly. I would at this point like to thank the people of Ellice for electing me to this Assembly, and I will not let them down.

I only hope that I can live up to their expectations as a member of this NDP Government. I'm under no illusions as to why I was elected as the member of the Legislative Assembly for the constituency of Ellice. Sure, some respected the way I fought as a member of the City Council for my area; others had dealt with me and were pleased with the relationship, and many appreciated the way I went to bat for them to secure fairne ss at City Hall in dealing with a problem that they had encountered. Some just appreciated that I tend to call a spade a spade, and that I was not afraid to tackle anyone at the civic level.

But it should be clear that the overpowering and paramount reason why I am the elected Member for Ellice is that I ran as a member of the New Democrat Party team.

Friday, 9 May, 1986 The people of Ellice, and indeed the people of this province, expressed their will on March 18 th when they elected our new Government. The people of Ellic e and the people of our great Province of Manitoba voted for the ideals of social and economic justice which this NDP Government represents. That is why it is such an honour for me to be given the opportunity of moving acceptance of the Throne Speech of our new Government. This Throne Speech clearly shows the direction of our new Government.

That is best illustrated by the following words in the Throne Speech: ". . . to help all Manitobans realize their full pote ntial." Every ini tia tiv e of our NDP Government enha nces the opportunities for the women, men and childr en of Manitoba to achieve all that they are capable of. Many of these init iatives strengthen the programs which were successful during the first term of this New Democratic Party Government. Our Government, during its last term, made the creation of jobs its main priori ty.

As a result, today 481 ,000 Manitobans are taking home a pay cheque, 20,000 more Manitobans than were employed in 1981. I frankly cannot understand the traditional Conservative approach to the economy that has let private capital have the total responsibili ty of creating employment. The position taken by these Conservatives is that job creation really means the creation of short-term jobs.

But what is the Cons ervative ans wer when our eco no my goes in a dow nhill dire ction and unemplo yment rises due to external factors such as world surpluses and falling prices for our commodities? lt is during times such as these that private capital dries up as the ec onomic picture is gloomy . No busi nessman inv ests when he or she believes next year the profits will sink significantly or when, in the near future, it appears sales will dwindle to such an extent that their investment is in severe jeopar dy.

Our NDP Government believes it should take steps to halt the downturn and, in fact, reverse the trend by job creation efforts. In 1983, our NDP Government established the Manitoba Jobs Fund with a budget of $200 million to support direct job creation while, at the same time, providing many community facilities. The Manitoba Jobs Fund is just one program among many designed to expand the number of jobs in this province. Let us look at one sector of activity of the Manitoba Jobs Fund over the last term of this NDP Government; that is, the Affordable New Homes Program.

In 19 84, the Manitoba Jobs Fund provided $19.1 million to aid fam ilies to purchase mod erately priced new homes at a lower interest rate than the preva iling market rate. This program not only encouraged renters to buy a new home, thus provi ding decent housing, but it also stimu lated construction activi ty, resulting in many many jobs for that industry. The other day I obtained a copy of the pamphlet put out by the Manitoba Jobs Fund called, "Lim estone Generating Station - Labour and Jobs." Let me quote a

section from that publication as it relates to jobs. "Lim estone means more than just energy. During construction, an estima ted 6,000 person years of di rect employment will be generated. With the construction industry in a slump across the west Limestone offers Manitoba a unique chance to maintain employment in the construction trades. Limestone means jobs." But the more important effect of the job creation efforts of our Government is not the di rect jobs that 21 are created, but the resulting indirect jobs which are stimulated. Every worker who is employed spends most of his pay cheque.

For example, when such a worker goes and buys a stereo system he increases the viabil ity of the stereo shop. When the stereo shop owner sees an increase in sales, he might plan to enlarge his building or at least hire more staff to meet the demand for his products. Every job created by this Government creates many more jobs, but indi rectly. All this helps to strengthen our provincial economy , thus encouraging pri vate capita l to inv est. A businessman will only invest if there is a good economic outlook; after all, he will not invest his capital if the risks are too great if, indeed, he might lose his shirt.

Busin ess people know that unemployed persons spend less because they have less to spend if they only have un emplo yment insu rance or other government assistance to aid them to survive day by day. Can you see someone setting up a new busine ss in the retail sector, say, in Newfou ndland where about one in four is on the dole? Such a busi ness will have a gr eater chance of success in a local ity where unemployment figures are lower, where people, because they are gainfully employed, have more money to spend. Capital will always go to where it can achieve the greatest return.

One simply does not invest in a slump. Our province is experiencing sign ificant growth in population, in personal income and in retail sales, reflecting the optimism which Manitobans have in their future. As a result, capital investment in our province is growing because the investment outlook is good. Statistics Canada, in commenting upon Manitoba's economic situation, reported that our province has had a 12.6 percent growth in capital investment during the past year, among the hig hest growth of any Canadian province.

On April 17 th of this year, th ere was a very encouraging report in the Wi nnip eg Free Press regarding Manitoba's prospects in the decade ahead. The head ing for the

article was: "Ma nitoba Predicted Leader In Grow th." The report goes on to state that: "The Royal Bank, in its pu blica tion, Econoscope, forecasts that Manitoba's predicted growth over the next decade will lead the nation." Canada's la rgest ch artered bank predicts that Manitoba's economy will grow at an average real rate of 3.4 percent annually to 1989, and at 3.5 percent annually from 19 90 to 1994.

The bank goes on to further state that: "This project growth is mainly due from this Government's decision to proceed with the construction of the Limestone Hydro Projec t." So we New Democrats firmly believe that the answer to reduce a downturn in our economy is to proceed with confidence, actively taking a role in managing the economy to enhance private investment.

Our New Democratic Party Government has lived up to its commitment to concentrate on improving the economy so all Manitobans will have a worthwhile future. lt pleases me that the Throne Speech states that our Government will strengthen its commitment to job creati on, which already has been the main goal of this Government. But why does our New Democratic Government choose the priority of job crea tion? Why have we said we must work in a cooperative way with businessmen, workers, farmers, community leaders, presidents of

I I • Friday, 9 May, 1986 organizations throughout our province, as well as with leaders at other levels of gover nment to create emplo yment? Because emp loyment does not just provide food on a family's table; because employment do es not just provide a roof over one's head . Employment is also a learning experience, a growth experience. When one learns on the job and becomes good at it there is a satisfact ion with one's life, especially if no one can match your expertise.

As your skills grow, your confidence naturally develops. lt may develop to such a degree that you may leave your place of work and set up your own business, and be self-employed. When your firm grows and could be calle d an established firm in the commun ity, there must indeed be a lot of satisfact ion in all that you have accom plished. Employment offers the opportunities of self-fulfilment. Unemployment is a degrading experience that can destroy the dignity of an indi vidual. The longer one is unemplo yed, the more devastat ing can be the result as door after door is shut in your face.

The longer one is unemployed the more difficult it is to achie ve a place in the work force. An emp loyer asks him self the question, why has this individual been unemplo yed so long? Why has no one hired him or her? After all, there are always some job openings. Why has no firm or government grabbed hold of this person? Maybe he or she does not have such ini tiative. The prospective employer, in the majority of cases, just does not want to take a chance on someone who no one else wants.

The employers thus question the worth of the individual and, before long, the ind ividual himself generally starts to wonder why he or she cannot find work and, in turn, starts to question their self-worth. Unemployment scars the individual, and we in the New Democratic Party cannot accept this mutilation of our fellow citizens. We have done much in the last term, and we are committed to strengthening our efforts so that anyone who wants to work will be able to work and be allowed to reach their full potential. We New Democrats cannot accept massive unemployment as a condition which we have to live with.

We marshalled all our resources to fight the war on unemplo yment during our last term of office, and we will continue this battle. Now compare our efforts in fighting unemplo yment with the Conservativ e Government of Alberta. Over the years, that province accu mula ted $16 billion from oil royalties, and have done very little to create jobs in that province. Premier Getty of Alberta has said he will not touch the principal of the Heritage Fund, and many Conservatives in that province speak of saving the fund for a rainy day.

This fund does give them the means to curb unemployment, but that government has refused to budge in its stand. They are really saying that an unemplo yment rate of 10.2 is an acceptable level in that province. The Metis Association of Alberta and the New Democratic Party of Al berta are right when they say that the funds could be used now to curb rising unemployment in that province. We have limited means, but we are doing all we can to fight the unemployment disease to our economic system here in Manitoba. Thus, one is better off in seeking employment in this province than one is in seeking work in Alberta.

I just cannot understand how the Conservative Government of Alberta can sit idly by with this nest egg when they could actually use it to im prove their econom y and reduce the unemplo yment levels in their province. 22 By the way, you should realize too that the election yesterday really showed that many people in Alberta are changing their minds about that government and are asking ... SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. H. SMIT H: . . . how can any government be so callous. But let us get back to Manitoba and the Throne Speech.

In listening to this Throne Speech of our Government, I'm im pressed with the vision, because it is a vision of equality of opportunity for all Manitobans so that every person can achieve his or her goals, only li mited by the extent of their abilities.

But I read the other day in the report of the Special Commit tee on Visible Min orities in Canadian Soci ety, a federal report - (Interjection) - but let's get back to Manitoba and the Throne Speech In listening to this Throne Speech of our Government, I'm impressed with the vision because it is a vision of equality of opportunity for all Manitobans so that every person can achieve his or her goals, only limi ted by the extent of their abil ity.

But I read the other day in the report of the Special Commit tee on Visible Minor ities in Canadian Soci ety, a federal report called "Equality Now," that research has shown that as many as 15 percent of the Canadian population exhibits blatant racist attitudes. Well another 20 percent to 25 percent of the population have some racist tendencies. Will not these racist attitudes make it more difficult to achie ve this vision of equality of opportunity for all? They definitely would if these attitudes spread and nothing was done to stunt their growth.

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." This statement is embodied in the univ ersal declaration of human rights and in The Human Rights Act, a provincial statute which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, national ity, religion, sex, age, handicap or other group stereotypes. I am certainly proud that this act was passed by the former NDP Government of Premier Schreyer as it definitely was the first step to com bat racist behaviour . I am equally pleased with the affirmative action policies signed by the Min ister of Labour and the then president of the MGEA on June 7, 1983.

This policy reads as follows: 'The Government of Manitoba and the MGEA are committed to the concept of affirmative action to redress existing discrimina tory barriers and to enhance promotion and equality of treatment within the Provincial Go vernment for women, physically disabled persons, Natives and visible mi norities. By formation of this poli cy, the ND P Government in Manitoba and the MGE A have shown leadership to right so many wrongs." Let me give you another example of another polic y, that of the encouragement of cultural activities by the granting of government grants.

I know the artistic director of the Blacklorama Cultural Association which sponsors the annu al Blacklorama Cultural Reggae Music Festival. He phoned me the other da y to tell me that the festival would be on home ground in Vimy Ridge Park - that is just south of my constituency - on August 3. During our convers ation, he related to me that the Blacklorama Cultural Association had

Friday, 9 May, 1986 received a grant of $1,5 00 from the Culture, Heritage and Recreation Department, and a sum of $8,400 from the Manitoba Jobs Fund. These two grants will help to make their programming more viable. I will never forget the first year when I dropped into the Reggae Music Festival and saw people whose ancestors came from all over the world basking in the sun, listening to the compulsive beat of the reggae sound. Is it not reasonable to conclude that people who enjoy associating together will grow to respect each other?

I believe that the Blacklorama Cultural Reggae Music Festival and Folklorama are two events which aid us in creating racial harmony within our capital ci ty. There are many other ini tiativ es of this Government which promote multiculturalism, and these show our government is truly interested in helping all Manitobans to realize their full potential. For those members of the Con servative opposition who may not agree with our Government's polic y, let me close this part of my add ress by citing a short poem by Robert Frost. "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice.

From what I've tasted of desire, I hold with those who favour fire. But if I had to perish twice, I think I know enough of hate to say that, for destruc tion, ice is also great, and would suffice." I sincerely believe tha t more people are hurt and many have their potential destroyed by hateful actions of others than this world ever realizes. The time has come in this speech for me to share with you the greatest moment that I experienced in the election campaign.

I don't remember the actual day, but I do recall rather vividly my enthusiasm following my reading of a press release with the heading, "P awley annou nces 10 -year 100 Million River Cleanup." Our rivers in the early da ys of our country were vital for transporting goods, as they served as unpaved high ways. You can just imagine how imp ortant they were to the development of our country before we had the trains, the tri ple-trailer vehicles and our contemporary planes. Rivers were the only efficient way to transport our products.

In those early days, it must have been awesome to tra vel down our rivers and behold the landscape and wildli fe. Our cities were tiny and did not have the people to contamina te our natural environment. Just imagine. There were no gigantic buildings standing along the banks to intrude into our view as we travelled down those rivers.

Today we can share part of that view and let me tell you - all of you - when you get tired from your heavy work load and need a real break, take a few hours and traverse a Manitoba river. lt really never fails to refresh you as you're away from concrete, you're away from a bustling schedule, and you may not even hear the ringing of a telephone. Rivers today are not just for recreat ional purposes. They supply us with fresh water. We need it to function, to drink, to grow food, to water our house plants, to bathe in. Life depends on it. There is no artificial water. Unlike Coca Cola, it has to be the real thing.

Fresh water is abundant in our great province in contrast with many other parts of the world. Worldwide, three-qua rters of the rural population, and one-fifth do not have access to an adequate supply of water. Millions of women spend a good share of each day walking 10 miles or more from their homes to obtain enough water for drinking or cooking. 23 As I was sayi ng, in Manitoba we have an abunda nt supply of water and, because it is so, we tend not to appreciate it. Turn the tap on, out comes the water.

There's even water for bath ing, wa shing the car, watering the lawn, operating ind ust ry, suppor ting agriculture and hundreds of other functions from filling water beds to carrying away the sewage that we all create, especial ly, I guess, some of you members on the opposite side of the House. Outside of air for brea thing, probably nothing has been more taken for granted by those who have it than water. The River Renewal Program of our Government will help ensure that our rivers are cleaner .

We need to start to reclaim our rivers and river banks so tha t all Manitobans tomorrow can enjoy their beauty and have the security of a fresh supply of water. Winnip eg is probably the clearest, most visible example of how, as a result of incr eased organization and industrial iza tion coupled with poor coordination and planning, our river system has deteriorated. lt is time to put an end to that. Now is the time for the restoration of our historic rivers. Our rivers cannot be allowed to deteriorate any further.

River renewal is best acco mpli shed with the cooperation and commitment of the cities and towns involved, along with the Federal Government and the private sector. This is a program for all Manitoba, a program all cities and towns along our rivers will be invited to participate in. Our re-elected New Democratic Government will, over the next 10 years, invest $10 0 million in this program to clean up our rivers. We expect the Federal Go vernment to match tha t commitment and to participa te as they have in other - (Interjection) - you don't think they will, eh?

They've done it in other provinc es and they should do it here, if they were being fair . We expect the Federal Government to match that commitment and to participa te as they have in other provinces, and our Government will encourage all communities along the Red and Assiniboine Rivers to partici pate as well. The River Renewal Program will see a single agency admin ister a new stream lined water polic y. The program will see the creation of river basin authorities, drawn from participating governments and the private sector to di rect the enhancement of the rivers which run through our cities and towns.

When the study is com pleted and priorities are set, the work will begin to impro ve water quality to develop more recreational facilities, riverbank parks, wal kways and bicycle paths, and improve the wildl ife and fish management, and provide new facilities for fishing and boating. Another direction of this Government is to advance the concept of pay equity so that equality of life will be improved for all working women within our province. lt should be remembered that our NDP Government during its last term introduc ed a legislative program setting up pay equity within all Provincial Government departments.

All Manitobans can be proud of the fact that their Provincial Government was the first Provincial Government to do so in this countr y. Equal pay for work that is of comparable value is a concept that we all agree on in this Cham ber. lt is only just that women working at jobs of equal value to those done by men at the same workpla ce should be entit led to receive a pay cheque of equal pay. If we can agree,

Friday, 9 May, 1986 as we do on this principle, should not every woman and man in this Chamber seek to have it apply to all working women in this province so we can have a more jus t economic system ? I would su gg est to the Conservative Opposition that they should be busy investigating ways to achieve the principle that they believe in. To believe in someth ing, but never taking a step to making tha t belief a realit y is inde ed hypocritical. Madam Speak er, this NDP Government will not make the same mistake as our Tory counterparts.

On Ma rch 18, the people of Ma ni toba chose a government commit ted to the ideal of social and economic justice. They voted for a government with vision, one which cares for all Manitobans. Madam Speaker, I pledge to work for the constituency of Ellice. I will work to see that ideals, so ably featured in the Speech from the Throne, will be fulfilled. it's an honour and a privilege for me to move this Sp eech from the Thr one for the Go vernment of Manitoba. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Kildonan. MR. M.

DOLIN: Madam Speaker , I, too, would like to congratulate you on your election to the highest office in this Legislature and I have full confidence in your ability and I am sure all mem bers of this House, as the Session goes on and what I have seen today and yesterday, will also share that confidence in your abilit ies to provide us with guidance. As a new member of this Legislature, I particularly look forward to your wisdom, advice and guid ance as to the order and the procedu res of this House and to ens ure tha t ther e is fair de bate and tha t I have opportunity to participa te fully, which I hope to do.

I wanted to also thank the Premier and the Executive Council for the honour of allowing me to second the Sp eech from the Throne and my appointment as Chairman of Commit tees of the Whole House. 1 would also like to praise the Honourable Member for Ellice who just delivered an excellent speech. l think one of the things that is very noticeable in the Member for Ellic e's add ress is his caring and concern and it is also what the Throne Speech is all about.

I think the Honourable Member for Ellice made that very clear . 1 think that is basically the reason why the Honourable Member for Ellice is the Honourable Member for Ellice and not somebody from an Opposition party. I also want to congratulate all the other 56 members of this House who went through a winter campaign which I know was not enjoyable for anybody and who did the hard work that had to be done, from members on both sides of this House, to get into this place. I particularly also would like to sympathize with those who did not make it and also put in the hard work and effort.

I think they deserve some sympathy from us for what they did. I want to giv e particular thanks to the people of my constituen cy, Kildonan, who had to elect me twice before I could actually be seated in this House. I thank them for their patience and, I hope, their good judgment. 1 believe, and I think perhaps somebody should check on this, that I have become an historical figure in this 24 Legislature, having been for two elections, seven months and five days before I actually was able to take my seat here. I believe that is some kind of Manitoba or Canadian record.

Also, Madam Speak er, I have some concern about, I'm a little confused on the rules. One of the things that I was led to believe is that debate in this Chamber is individual debate and what I have seen from members of the Opposition seems to be mass debate and I am not clear as to whether or not this is within the rules of the House. I await your ruling on that, Madam Spe aker. I would like, having mentioned the constituency of Kildonan, to perhaps describe my constituency to some extent to the members of this Assembly.

I think this is probably my first opportunity to do tha t and I hope to be work ing very dili gentl y for the people in my constitue ncy. I would like my honourable colleagues in this House to understand who they are, where they come from, and what some of the issues are facing people of my constituen cy. I would also like to point out that how elements of this Gov ernment's Throne Sp eech relates to the problems of my constituency and how this Government has a plan to be able to deal with the problems of my constituency and other constituencies in the province.

First, my constituency is made up of three primary areas. One is the Maples, the other is Garden City and the other is Old Kildonan. The population of this constituenc y is the larg est popul a tion of any constituency in this province. There's an interesting and very unique ethnic mix in my constituency which is basically made up, particularly in the Maples area, which is the newest area, of new immigr ants and the sons and daughters and second generation to a great extent, of the immigr ants of the last wave who came into this country in 1910, 1920, etc.

You have all races; you have all creeds; you have all religions and the community seems to work togeth er. lt seems to work together very well. There are certain elements of racism in the community as there are in the rest of the province. I think the Government has taken steps and the community is working very diligently to erase this and to bring an open minded attitude toward new immigr ants from prior imm igrants and from other people in other parts of the province.

Basical ly, the people of my area are middle class, hard-wo rking people who work in trades, professions, small busine ss, etc., who did su pport this Government in the last two elections and the by-elections, and I think with good reason. One of the things that is happening is there seems to something of a housing boom, and a boom in the retail sector and man ufact uring sector in my constituenc y. Those of you who have driven up McPhillips Road or have seen the north end of the Maples or Garden City can see there is an enormous amount of construction going on.

The retail sector is booming in this area; housing is booming. I think a great deal of that is due to the efforts of the Min istry of Housing here. A lot of the housing has been built on and with government support on government land. I notice the Minis ter of Co-op Development has certainly helped. There is one co-op on Leila which is expan ding. There is a new co-op development being built on Mandala y

Friday, 9 May, 1986 which I think will be equally success ful. I think the efforts of this Government have allo wed people to have decent housing in a ni ce neighbo ur hood and all owed businessmen to provide the services to service them and everybody to live comfortably and make a decent living. I would also like to point out something interesting on a personal note about the ethnic mix. Last year the Maples High School soccer team won the Provincial High School Soccer Championship. There was only one Canadian born child - child, I say - on that soccer team. lt happened to be my son.

I'm very proud of the fact that he was the only Canadian born. I think it not only shows that the children can play together and win, it shows that their parents can work together and win. Also another thing that this brings to mind is the Seven Oaks School Division, which serves the majority of my constituenc y and some of the Premier's constitu ency, has long been recognized for being one of the most - and the Honourable Mini ster for Seven Oaks - progressive school divisions in the province. That reputation I think is well-deserved.

You have a very hard- working school board; you have some excellent teachers, their programs, that of the Provincial Go vernment, as far as lingui stic and cultural benefits to the people, the parents and the childr en of the constituenc y, which have been taken advantage of by the Seven Oaks School Division, and the schools seems to be expanding and doing extremely well. Another area which has been worked on is good senior citizen housing. This Government has promoted and in the Throne Speech it's noted that this will continue to be expanded.

Some of the best senior citizen housing in the province happens to be in my constitue ncy. There is no question tha t more is needed. There is also no question that more will be provided by this Government as outlined in the Throne Speech. Another thing is there is a building at 1010 Sincla ir, which is in my constitue ncy, which is a residence for people who are disabled through either illness or through auto accidents or what have you, which is an exempla ry facility for this kind of person.

An interesting thing with Go vernment support that has happened in this building is the Seven Oaks Day Care Centre has moved their operations into the basement of this building to allo w a mix and a feedthrough between disabled people and children who are not disabled. I think this is an excellent program. I think it serves as an educational and involvement vehicle for both the disabled people who live in the building and the children, to be able to have a better understa nding. What we saw in the Throne Speech was very clearly this Government's commitment to aid the disabled.

I think one of the things that has to happen on both sides of the House and in the public before we provide the aid to the dis abled is something very simple. That's understanding of what it is to be disabled and an empathy with the disabled, not just sympathy . My constituency presi dent, who ha s been my cons tituency president for some time, who was the office manager in the campaign, is a blind woman with one leg. The first reac tion people had to her was that, how can she run a campaign office if she's blind? How can she answer a multi-line phone?

People expressed concern and, very simp ly, if we make those decisions without asking people who are disabled - they have 25 learned to cope. She brought out this penlight which beeps when it hits the phone line. She knows which phone line is on. She took messages. She ran that office in a mil ita ry, sergeant-major type of manner such as I have never seen in a campaign before. I think one of the things we have to learn is to allo w the disabled to speak for themselves, to allo w them to be involved in planning for themselves, and not make judgments for them.

I would also point out that this particular woman has led a campaign against the City of Winni peg to stop them from paying less rates or no rates for public transit. Her opinion is that she is a citizen. She uses the public transit, and I think generally what she is saying is that she wants to be treated and given the same opportun ity and fair treatment. She does not want to be sympathized with or patronized. I think one of the problems we have with the disabled is we have a tendency to do that.

I think, very clearly , we should stop doing that, and I think what we see in the Throne Speech Is thi s Government's commitment not to patronize and not to sympathize, but to work with the disabled people of this province to ensure that they have fair treatment and fair access to all the facilities tha t this provinc e provides. Getting back to Kildonan, another little problem that I think some of the other members have seen in developing areas, in the Maples and north Garden City and particularly developing areas, is the lack of door­ to-door mail services.

I think one of the problems and one of the reasons for this is the privatization of the post office. In turning Canada Post into a Crown corporation and, in the recent Budget Speech of the Honourable Mr. Wilson in Parliament, Mr. Wilson stated very clearly , and gave a timetable, tha t Canada Post must be self-financing. Basically what I hear him saying is, whether or not the service is adequate to the public or not, and whether or not the price is fair to the public or not. Well, I think what we are seeing in my area and what people are seeing in the new developing areas is, the public be damned!

The object of the exercise is to balance the books, and what used to be a public service that was a requirement for the people of this country to be able to keep in formed and to be able to communic ate has now become secondary to balancing the books in Canada Post. I think that is an aw ful situa tion. I think, if this is what happens with privatiza tion, then privatization be damned! I think this brings me also to the matter of Co nservative dogma.

The Conservatives accuse us, on occa sion, of being a dogmatic party, that we have a dogmatic Government, that we are the ones who run down streets with red banners and whatnot. What you see in the Throne Speech and what is very clear in the Throne Speech - (Interjection) - Is that some more of that mass deba te that I'm hearing? Wha t we see in the Throne Speech here is a Government that's commi tted to a planned econ omy, planned social services with a game plan, with an idea of the future and, on a pragmatic basis, dealing with the issues of the day as they are relevant and as they come up.

This is not commitment to dogma that private enterprise is always better than public enterprise, what my Conservative friends on the other side of the House say. I would like to see them explain to me how Dome Petroleum is better than Manitoba Telephone.

Friday, 9 May, 1986 They also say that private employers and private management is superior to public management - (Interjection) - I will get to that. I think what they are basically sayi ng, which is insulting to every civil servant in this province, in this count ry, is civil servants, by the definition that they work for government, are naturally inferior to people who work for McDonald's or General Motors. I find that offensive, and I also think, if anybody considers it carefully , they know it is not true. I think one of the things, and I think when Mr.

Sherman was asked to look very carefully at the health care system and to consider privatiza tion, I happened to read his recommendations to the Honourable Jake Epp, and they're not quite as clear-cut or as specific as Mr. Epp would have us believe or the way the press misi nterpreted, I believe, what Mr. Epp was sa ying. Basically what Mr. Sherman was saying was what I consider rational, reasonable argument. Basically what he said, if it works, don't fix it. Good management is good management, whether it's in the private sector or public sector. We, on this side of the House, have always believed that.

We believe that public enterprises with good management can be as efficient, if not more efficent, than private enterprise. I think the dogma coming from the other side is that is imp ossible by definition. I think the reality of that is - I give you once again Dome Petroleum and Manitoba Telephone. I give you Chrysler versus Manitoba Hydro. Nobody bailed out Manitoba Hydro. I think what we are talking about and what Mr. Sherman was talking about is the idea of a non-dogmatic approach to planning the economy , to planning the social services, for planning the mix, is the fact that you have to have a plan.

The business community has to know where it's going. One of the things I have heard lately as a distinct and continuing criticism from the business community of the Federal Conservative Government is, very simp ly, they do not know what's happening one year down the road, they don't know what's happening five years down the road . You can't plan a business, and I'm sure people on that side of the House, some of whom may be able to run a chicken shack or a used car lot - I have very sincere difficulty believing that the members opposite can run a government. Certainly there has to be a plan.

The fact is where a dogmatic approach that you privatize everything, that only the private sector can do it, has been proven wrong in this country over more than 11 5 years. The fact is that a plan allows both business people and working people to understand what their future is and how to plan the operations of their own ind ustry.

The Conservative supp orters from the busi ness community - and this was in the Financial Times, I believe, I cannot quote specifically , but it has certainly been public in various financial papers - do not know where they're going with the Conservative Government because the Conservative Government federally has no plan, no direction. The tax system seems to be changed on almost a daily basis. lt is a hodgepodge and a mess, and I think the members opposite, certainly in question period toda y, were pointing out indir ectly that very fact, that the tax system in this country is just insane.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hour being 12 :30, I am interrupting the debate in accordance with sub-rule 3.(4). 26 The Honourable Opposition House Leader. MR. G. MERCIER: Ma dam Speak er, we are prepared to grant leave on this side, although I can't speak for the Member for River Heights, if the member wishes to speak for another five mi nutes to conclude his remarks. MADAM SPEAKER: Is that agreed? (Agreed) The Honourable Member for Kildonan. MR. M. DOLIN: Thank you. Since I only have five minutes, there is something that struck me this morning and that has been striking me in the media for the last few days.

I have always had some concerns, as I'm sure most members of this House had, with some of the cults that appear from time to time in this province. There seems to be a new cult, a new self-proclaime d messiah with 25 disciples in the Church of Posturing Purity, who talks about - and I heard it this morning. I have heard the words "i ntegrity" and "credibi lity" as if there was a monopoly on that. I have the words "truth," "morali ty," "honesty." I have also heard a word that I had never heard before and that's "la belize," "labelizing." I want to say that I feel this is a very dangerous road.

I am not particularly condemning the honourable new messiah, as he's self-proclaimed, the holder of virtue in the palm of his hand, but what I am saying is this is a very dangerous road and it goes back to the New Testament where they say: "L et he who is without sin cast the first stone." I think, as we are all honourable members in this House, there is a certain reasonable level of honourableness. I do not think any man or woman in this Ho use can stand up and claim a monopoly on virtue and purity.

I am beginning to hear that over and over again. lt is also an extremely difficult problem to look at the situation, for example, with Sinclair Stevens and Noreen Stevens. Let me point out what is happening here. Here is a man who puts his money in blind trust - his wife who holds the blind trust, who makes a loan from a com pany tha t is doing bu si ness with hi s department in the Federal Government - which has gotten approximately $13 0 million worth of business. What Sinclair Stevens is saying is that he didn't know she did it.

He doesn't talk to his wife about such issues; they did not discuss the situation of her making the loan. I would say if I believed Sinclair Stevens, which I should because he is an honourable member, I would suggest that he has another problem. Here is a man whose marriage is in serious trouble. His wife goes out and borrows $2.6 milli on and doesn't tell him? I have a very serious problem with that.

I would like to point out - and I think this is not only as a caution to the members opposite, but members on this side of this House - I would like to point out that people who get up on white horses and stand on the pulpit and wear the white gowns and white cloaks are the ones where the mud and dirt shows up best. I would suggest that if one wishes to stand there and take a position of having a monopoly on virtue, a monopoly on truth, a monopoly on all tha t is good and kind in the world, one should be very careful.

I have only a minute or two left so what I would say is I look forward to this Session as a learning experience,

Friday, 9 May, 1986 I have already learned something this morning. I have learned some lessons about good and evil, about truth and beauty. I intend to learn a great deal more in the coming Session of the Legislature. I intend to work with my Premier and my colleagues to make sure that this Government continues on the planned road to make this province the best province in this count ry, to stand up against the federal erosion of our plan to make this province the best province in the count ry, and also to learn exactly what is a Progressive C