LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, 21 August, 1986. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - GOVERNMENT SERVICES MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: We're considering the Estimates of the Department of Government Services . We are on Resolution 76 , item 2.(a) - the Member for Turtle Mountain . MR. D.

ROCAN: We were dealing with the general field of Property Management and I believe my colleague asked for it already, but I was wondering if it's possible if the Minister could provide us with a list of all the properties where the government leases space, the name of the property, the owner, and the amount of rent that is paid. I presume it's on a per square footage basis. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, that 's 2.(d), I think, as opposed to 2.(a). Is that right? Should we go down the way there nicely now? Since we got Mr.

Manness ' comments out of the way with regard to Manitoba Properties earlier, maybe we should go in sequence now. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, J. Maloway: The Member for Ste. Rose . MR. G. CUMMINGS: If we could look at (aX1) and (2) under

Part 2 is where we would like to start. The reason that the question was asked under this area is because of the general heading of Property Management. We will try to get within the line questions to get things going . In this area, again we see a change in staff turnover time but what I wanted to ask the Minister is if he could outline what the status of the employees are . We have managerial , technical, and then administrative support. What falls under administrative support there? Is that secretarial and what else, clerical? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The question, Mr.

Chairman, was with regard to administrative support. We have an AY3 secretary, executive director of Property Management, and we have a resource clerk, typist, an administrative officer , systems operator, administrative secretary , assistant computer operator, manager, property administration, administrative services, resource clerk, administrative officer - (inaudible) - nation and management administration policy direction, budgeting and planning for the Property Management Division.

The Executive Administration includes the Property Administrative Services Branch, which is responsible for decentralized and automated administrative and financial information systems within the Property Management Division . I'm not sure what else the member wants to know. We've given the various people and their titles . MR. G. CUMMINGS: The reason I asked the question under - they 're in as administrative support. I wanted to understand the qualifications and responsibilities that would fall to som e of the various people . When you refer to a systems operator, what is a systems operator? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: This person, the systems operator operates the computer system for the Property Management and provides the department with financial reports by costs centre, various centres, either building section, leasing, employee housing units, and so on. MR. G. CUMMINGS: When we refer to decentralized and automated , administrative and financial inform ation systems here, what is decentralized and automat ed? Is there a computer link-up between other zones within the department? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Could the Minister expand on that? Is information gathered and distributed through that system?

HON. J. PLOHMAN: The information from all of the zones is provided on a continuous basis to the Central Centre - at 1700 Portage Avenue - where this data is put together by a centralized system and then sent out to the various zones back to them giving them an aggregate total and detailed total of the expenditures and budgets of what they could spend and what they have spent on various areas under their jurisdiction . MR. G. CUMMINGS: Is this tied into a central inventory list? Is this the area that would be responsible for that if there is one? If I could add a little to that, Mr.

Chairman, if this system is gathering information to be brought into 1700 Portage , is it stored there and used as information to ultimately keep a list of stocks and stores that are on hand? Is that what is communicated through the system? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, my understanding is, this does not deal with the inventory as such . That is under a separate program . Although the same terminals are used for that purpose , for inventory, it's not under this particular program . We're dealing with the expenditures on Physical Plant the various expenditures in that regard . MR. G.

CUMMINGS: This would be the same equipment that would be used , however - the computer terminal? HON. J. PLOHMAN: My understanding is that it 's the same equipment . There 's not a duplication of equipment 3240

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 for every different system that's in place. It's the same equipment that is used. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm not sure if you're dealing with Executive Administration or Physical Plant; which one is it? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Executive Administration. MR. J. DOWNEY: I suppose it may overlap into Physical Plant but it could come under Executive Administration , the questions I'm going to ask .

Basically - and the Minister can correct me if I'm wrong - my general understanding of the overall plant of the government that we're talking about is, for example, the building which we are in here; the Norquay Building. For example, is the Churchill Complex , the operation of it part of the overall Government Services responsibility; the penal institution at Brandon ; or the Headingley facility operated by the government, is that all part of the Government Services Department? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chai rman, Churchill Centre is operated by the town and there 's just simply a grant paid by the government - technical advice to the town operat ions - so it's not part of our Physical Plant, as such . The other examp les mentioned , Headingley, that's all part of it and the Norquay Building , of course . MR. J. DOWNEY: Would the Minister be prepared to give us a list of those government buildings that do fall within this allocation of funds, Physical Plant - those that now are still owned by the province and are still carried out under the authority? The other question that I would have, Mr.

Chairman, the Minister said that there's no direct responsibility by the province to look after the Churchill Complex. How much money is the annual grant to that complex? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm not sure that this is the proper place to discuss that one, but it is maximum of $1 million. I think last year it was $970,000 or so and we budgeted $1 million for it. So far as the other statement that was made regarding a list of buildings, I imagine the member is asking for those accommodations that are leased by the province , or only those that are owned by the province.

If he's asking that , then most of the ones that we were mentioning earlier will be titled under Manitoba Properties Incorporated; and if they're asking for a list of those properties, I believe they were given a list of those properties during discussion of the Minister of Finance, MPl's discussion . We have those lists as well. But I understand that you did ask for them during the Finance Estimates discussion . Then there 's other buildings that are still not transferred or will never be transferred to MPI and we also have a list of those buildings which the members , Mr. Chairman, may not have . MR. J.

DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , again I'm on two lines of thought here and I'll continue on the one initially, th e Churchill Complex, and I'll come back to the other one later. The Churchill grant, is that a conditional grant? Does that go for heat or light or is it just a block grant which goes to the City of Churchill, to pay for the upkeep ; or is there an upkeep factor in there ; or is it just for heat and light and whatever else comes under the general operating expenses of that complex? Does that cover the operating costs of the complex at Churchill? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: This covers up to 90 percent of the net operating costs. It is 90 percent of the net operating costs of the Churchill Town Complex, to a maximum of $1 million, either 90 percent or maximum of $1 million . It covers all of the operating expenses. Every element of operating is eligible for that 90 percent of funding . MR. J. DOWNEY: Is there any provision in that grant to look after depreciation or upgrading of that facility? Because I would think that the type of building it is, the weather conditions that it has to endure, that basically there would be a fairly high depreciation factor.

Is there a special fund or amount of money used for that general upkeep? HON. J. PLOHMAN: It should be made clear that the Province of Manitob a owns th at complex. It' s operated by them and then we subsidize them. There's no dollars going in from the subsidy every year towards depreciated costs towards replacement or upgrading of that building. It would be undertaken in the same way that many major upgrades are undertaken for government buildings in the future as necessary. It's one of the buildings that is now on the MPI list. MR. J.

DOWNEY: On the other question dealing with the buildings , any information that hasn 't been provided through questioning of the Minister of Finance as far as buildings that are not part of the investment program under the government , would be appreciated. I have a colleague who I have talked to about this and I ask the Minister now to deal specifically with some of the government institutions and the provisions of, for example, Headingley Jail , where the foods are provided by the province.

Has there ever been any consideration to tendering out the food services for those kinds of institutions or has it ever been looked at by this Minister or this government? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The institutes are actually responsible to the Department of Community Services and Corrections which undertake to tender or provide the food services themselves , not through this department, so I'm not certain. I believe they tender out , and there ' s a lot of inm ate labour in those institutions such as Headingley . MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman , I guess I appreciate the fact that the buildings are the responsibility of Government Servi ces and the whol e area of the service provided within those buildings falls within ano the r department. I' m just somewhat interested to further the questioning dea ling with the grounds and that type of 3241

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 thing in which the Government Services are responsible and that is the whole maintenance of the grounds dealing with the penal institutions and that type of thing. Do Government Services have the policy that they go out and hire individuals to go out and look after the gro und maintenance in those areas, or in fact is there a work crew from within the institution to look after that? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I understand, Mr. Chairman , that we have one staff person, a gardener, at Headingley who supervises inmates , work crews , who work with him on the grounds.

In the smaller institutions , such as at Brandon and Dauphin, the building supervisors super vise inmates to provide this service. MR. J. DOWNEY: That covers pretty well what I have in this section. I may have some a littl e later on. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Anybody else on (a)(1) or (aX2). MR. G. CUMMINGS: On e last question in that area. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Okay. The Member for Ste. Rose . MR. G.

CUMMINGS: It just strikes me that the way the departments are broken down here, that if you look at Executive Support , there 's 261,000 in Administration , almost half-a-million in the department we 're in now in the Administration. Then you go into the third area , there's another $125,000 , there 's a considerable number of administrative positions in the department. Is this an increase of positions in this area in the last four years? Inasmuch as the responsibility, I understand, in terms of total budget has not changed a lot , have you any idea if there has been an increase in this area of staff requirement?

HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I don 't believe there has been a substantial increase . As a matter of fact, a number of years ago it would have been decreased with reorganization of the department . We have to keep in mind that there 's more emphasis on systems and automation. People involved in computers are generally classified as administrative , but management as opposed to other classifications, that would seem to indicate that there's less emphasis on management. In other words, it's a distortion because of the emphasis on automation, those people are clas sified as management.

So that tends to add people even though I don 't think it's justifiable in terms of one 's view of a management structure , that it would look that there's all kinds of managers sitting around and no people doing the work at the grassroots level. I don't believe there has been an increase. There certainly hasn't been this past year and there hasn't been a dramatic increase. If any, it has been in the computer automation areas . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: (aX1) - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: I won't keep you too long , Mr. Chairman.

Responsible for promoting physical responsibility, what is the physical responsibility? The actual looking after of the property , the buildings , the . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Fiscal money spending responsibility. MR. A. KOVNATS: Okay. I have some questions on the next sect ion , so I just wanted to check on that. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: (a)(1) and (a)(2)-pass . (b)(1) - the Member for Niakwa . MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I do have a couple of very, very short questions here. I don't think it should take too long .

This is the maintenance of government-owned and lease d properties throughout the province including office buildings and court facilities and community college, health and correctio nal institutions . It seem s that it ' s a wide-rang in g area that the Minister is res ponsibl e fo r. But I had brought it up to the Minister on one previous time when we were under the Department of Highways , and I was told it wasn 't unde r that particular

section . We are talking about a facility that I think is government­ owned which is about five miles east of Pansy Road and No. 12 Highway , for his assistants there, so they would know. There 's a couple of washroom faciliti es there that have women on one and men on the other, and I had reported to the Minist er on a previou s occasion concerning these washroom facilities , and actually it's a bit of a camping faci lity because there 's a wooden tab le there that's falling apart. I think it's all part of the government 's responsib ility on thi s Governmen t Services.

Before I go any further, are you aware of the location of which I am speaking? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I recall , Mr. Chairman, that the Member for Niakwa raised this issue . I think at that time, whether rightly or wrongly, I believed it was the responsibility of the parks, Natural Resources. Now I don 't know whether the member has some evidence that's not the case , but that would seem to be the case with these washrooms that are located in wayside parks or something like that .

We don't have , or at least the staff indicates that they don't have any knowledge of that facility insofar as Government Services is concerned. I'm not trying to run away from the member. He's asked in Highways and now in Government Services . MR. A. KOVNATS: Well , you 're not going to be able to, Mr. Minister. The reason that I get all excited about it is because if it does come under Governmen t Services, for instance , as I mentioned, it 's a men's washroom and a women 's washroom. It's just a little building, but it's really gone to rack and ruin .

It's an area, even if I was desperate , I wouldn 't go into it. The reason that I thought that it would be the responsibility of this department is because I would think that the Minister would be the Minister of 3242

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 washrooms and toilets and things like that, and he does look after the one across the street. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm advised that's the only one . MR. A. KOVNATS: But I don't think that you can shirk the responsibility, Mr. Minister, like the one across the street. You've accepted responsibi lity there. I think that you've got to accept the responsibility of this washroom that's out on Pansy Road, just about four or five miles east of Pansy Road, on No. 12 Highway.

I thought that the Minister would have taken it as his responsibility because I had pointed out about a broken sign under the Department of Highways at Menisino and that sign had been repaired. So I've trusted the Minister up until now and I thought that he would have looked after this particular washroom. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman, I've indicated that it isn't the responsibility of my department directly. In the case of the sign, it was, so . .. . MR. A. KOVNATS: And was looked after. HON. J. PLOHMAN: . . . fortunately it was looked after.

But in this case, I wouldn't want to suggest where the member should ask the questions but if Natural Resources is still going on in the House, he might pick up his books and go off and ask the Minister of Natural Resources in there whether he is responsible for this particular one, but I'm not giving him any red tape , because what we'll have the staff do, they 've taken down the location and they will contact directly, but if he wanted to get an answer right away tonight , he might want to ask the Natural Resources staff.

Meanwhile, we're going to check into notifying the appropriate agency that there needs to be some work done on these things . MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm a little bit concerned that I'd be sent over to the Minister of Natural Resources. He's a fairly new Minister . I did have the opportunity of speaking with him this afternoon and I was trying to get some information on prairie skinks. Well, I wasn 't the one who brought it up because the Honourable Minister had suggested that I check with him.

I really wasn't satisfied with the results that I got from that Minister and I have been satisfied with the results that I've had from this Minister in the past because the sign has been repaired and if I go to where I've had success, that's why I go back to the Minister again in this particular case. You know, once I get on to something, I follow it through because it is a very important thing. It's the only washroom facility that I can use or that my wife can use as we go out to our farm at Menisino and it's just not satisfactory, Mr. Minister.

It has been cleaned up on occasion, but every time that I go by, the garbage is filled right up in the cans there . I guess they must take it away on occasion, but I really felt that it was Government Services that were responsible . If the Minister is just going to hold his hands up and say he is not responsible, I guess I'm going to have to accept it and I really don't know where to go from here . I'm awfully frustrated , but I really don 't know . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I just want to say, I didn't hold my hands up. I said that we will notify ; we'll find out who is responsible.

It's quite different when we're dealing with something that we're directly responsible for. MR. A. KOVNATS: Well, I read where it was government owned and leased through the province, including office buildings, I just assumed because of . . .. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That those washrooms were office buildings? MR. A. KOVNATS: No, washrooms are washrooms.

Either the one across the street, which is a pretty nice facility , the Minister responsible is no longer around , that was Russ Doern , and I hope the same prob lem doesn't befall this Minister because I think that he really is conscient ious and he really knows how to look after washrooms except in this particular case . - (Interjection) - well, except in this particular case , this washroom is not being looked after and I wouldn't want it on the Minister 's record that he's not able to look after washrooms .

If he's not going to accept the responsibility of this one or he's going to check it out , I guess I can accept that, Mr. Chairman. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Thank you. MR. A. KOVNATS: Can we move down to where it says , "A Minister 's care of government grounds and greenhouses throughout Manitoba. " ? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Do you want to pass (bX1)? MR. A. KOVNATS: Is that not all part of the Physical Plant of (b)? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Okay, go ahead . MR. A. KOVNATS: Okay, fair enough . I wouldn't want to break any rules here . I see them being broken in the Chamber on both sides as a matter of fact.

I'm not one to break ru les because of my previous background. The Minister knows my background. I'm one who follows the rules; I try to follow the rules. If we can get down to government grounds and greenhouses, and there's a bit of a conflict here because we 're talking about government grounds and greenhouses and we're talking about Security and Parking which is

Section (

f) down the way. But I think what I'm going to ask comes under this particular section. When we talk about government grounds , has there been any plans for parking facilities to be made availab le on these government grounds, underground facilities? I won't ask the questions later on when we get to the parking, if I can get the answer now. Has there been any plans to provide additional parking facilities on these government grounds, either underground or a structure above, or anywhere around this area to supply parking for the people that need it, government workers, visitors , things of that nature , Mr.

Chairman? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'm only conc erned that we're going to duplicate discussions. I know the member for ... 3243

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm not going to du plicate them, I've given you that assurance. HON. J. PLOHMAN: No, but the member is not the only one here. The Member for Turtle Mountain has ind icated he wants to talk about security and parking, and so on. I know we're going to have discussions then. It seems rather fruitless and counter-produc tive to discuss parking in one situation up here, and then that member leaves and another member goes through the whole issue again. If we want to discuss the whole issue of parking now, if the Member for Turtle Mountain and the Member for Ste.

Rose would like to do that, that's fine, then let's do it once and get it over with. MR. A. KOVNATS: All right, that's fair enough. We're not trying to prolong anything here . . .. HON. J. PLOHMAN: No, but it happens that people come in and they come in and out . . .. MR. A. KOVNATS: Okay, that's fair. Then let's get back to what I originally proposed.

There had been some discussion years back, because we are very, very short of government facilities here for parking cars, and we have a lot of government cars - probably too many in some cases because I think the Minister, the executive assistants, everybody seems to have a government car. If they have a government car, we have to provide a facility for parking that car. What plans are made to provide additional facilities right here on these Legislative grounds? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, this issue has been one that has long been a difficulty and has not been properly add ressed by successive governments.

MR. A. KOVNATS: I agree. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I have information on reports that go back at least 20 years which haven 't been acted upon, for whatever reaso n. I guess primarily because government employees were not paying for parking and if you get involv ed with charging for parking, then that's a benefit that has to be negotiated with MGEA. It just seems to have not been a priority over the years. But I agree that there is a need. The latest study was done in 19 81.

It would indicate that if there was a charge for parki ng, there would be a lot less demand, so we would eliminate a lot of the vehicles around because people would seek alternat ive ways of getting to work, whether it be by bus or car pools or wha tever the case might be. So that seems to be the solution to it, that there should be some charge for parking. Insofar as the number of government cars, it has been kept very stable in the last three years.

We don't have more government cars, but we're not just talking about government cars, we're talking about people who work for the government and drive their cars to work who require parking faci lities, not just government cars. I'm sur e the member was not insinuating that there's been a prolif eration of government cars and that's why we have a problem with parking. MR. A. KOVNATS: I don't think that's what I was say ing. It might have sounded . . .. HON. J. PLOHMAN: But we do have on Kennedy Street, a sur face parking lot that could be developed into a parking facility and a parkade of some kind.

That's an area we want to look at, at the present time, to alle viate the pressure here. Because with more buildings, the Law Courts comp lexes being renovated and built; the new Law Courts Building, Land Titles Building being renovated and the old Law Courts Buildings being renovated; there are more people working in this area, more government employees, and therefore a very acute shortage of parking space. People who work in other areas, in the Core area, als o park here - government empl oyees - and then walk over to their place of empl oyment.

So that is also a problem which we have, so we are looking at some type of facility that would alle viate this problem and would involve charging for parking. MR. A. KOVNATS: I don't know how seriously the Minister's department is looking at a facility to provide parking, but it appears to me to be a very, very serious problem, inasmuch as some of my background has been with parking and I do know a little bit about it.

When we lost whatever little parking facility we had over at the Law Courts, and there were some cars being parked there, and we lost that and we seem to be building on parking lots and not replacing. I think that the situation is not just serious, I think it is critical. I have a feeling for people who have to bring their cars to work, whether it's a government car or their own; but if it's their own, I'm sur e if th ey're on government business, they're given some sort of a su bsidy for bringing their own car.

I would hope that we are able to arrange some kind of arrangements so that people will double up in cars and triple up in cars, and have car pools, because that's the right way to do things. The Minister alluded to that. Is there any benefit to a government empl oyee in being able to pick u p somebody along the way and bring him into work? Do they receive any benefits? Why should they do it, out of the goodness of their hearts or do we encourage them by giving them some sort of a subsidy? Let's say that we're going to charge for parking on a government facility - and I think you should.

You might have to arrange with the other people - and that includes members of the Legislature and that includes Ministers. The Ministers can pay through their department and the members of the Legislature could pay for it through some way, but I think that everybody should pay. My attitude is that the user pays, but if you're going to encourage somebody to join in car pools, are you going to give them some benefit? Are you going to make a charge and give them some reduced rate for parking?

I'd love to be the Minister of this department, but I think the Minister has got a handle on this and I think he's got some plans. I'd like to hear what plans he has. HON. J. PLOHMAN: There's many ways to look at this. Obviously the benefit to the individuals is that they share the gas costs of driving, so there's the benefit when they're in a car pool. But obviously there hasn't been enough incentive for them to do that, and nobody is doing it right now. I don't know that the government should provide any

part icular kind of benefit to people 3244

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 who do that, although we could give them preferential parking. Someone who is involved in a car pool would get the prime spots or something like that for parking . This is being pursued in really two ways; one through joint council, which is the MGEA and Cabinet Committee which discusses matters of concern to both employee s and government, an informal mechanism. It's not the salary negotiations, but it is another mechanism where we meet on a regular basis to discuss issues that concern employees and concern government, such as park ing, such as smoking policies , so on and so forth .

This is being pursued at the present time with them. As well, we're looking at other options of providing a facility where perhaps the government would not be charging directly, but a private developer might be charging for parking , if they were interested , so we're looking at that possible option as well. But I agree , we have staff in this building who are paying tickets almost on a daily basis, through no fault of their own, and I believe basically, government employees are prepared to pay for parking if they get a good, secure parking spot .

So keeping those two things in mind, I think it's urgent and it's time that we dealt with it and we intend to deal with it, one way or another; either through negotiated arrangement or through other method , we're going to have a solution to it. MR. A. KOVNATS: You know, it kind of scares me that I agree with what the Minister is saying and we're kind of on stream together that our plans for the future seem to be quite similar and it does scare me becaus e we've agreed on something but we've disagreed on a lot of other things, but this one we seem to agree on .

I am concerned also concerning the - and whatever advice I'm giving you is strictly free and if you can use it, please do so - the aesthetic value of these different parking facilities . I look across the street , I guess over on the other side of Kennedy, which we have some parking lots and those are government parking lots . I remember when I was operating parking lots. We had to try and disguise them with trees and underground so that people couldn 't see them.

Has the government given any spec ial privileges that they don't have to disguise or make parking lots look like they're nice facilities rather than just places to park cars? Are there any differences between government owned parking lots and individually owned parking lots? HON. J. PLOHMAN: No, Mr. Chairman, the government has to comply with the by-laws of the city in the same way that others have to. MR. A. KOVNATS: Can I suggest , Mr. Chairman , that we plant a few trees over there?

You know, we're given trees through Natural Resources, I guess, every year, and I certainly appreciate the tree that I get, but I just wonder whether in fact we could plant a few trees and just make it a little bit nicer until such time as we're going to go underground or convert that property to something else . There's nothing like a little bit of green in the middle of all these buildings and I wouldn't want to disrupt the Legislative grounds under any circumstances. But do we have any problems in going underground in the Legislative grounds rather than provide additional facilities?

Let's get all the cars off the surface bec ause there is nothing worse than to see those cars parked along the front and I know one of them is my car and it used to be one of them was my truck . My wife used to say to me you can 't park that truck in front of the Legislature; it needs a coat of paint and everything else. We've got to provide facilities for disguising parking lots and parking facilities. I hope I'm not both ering the Member for The Pas. Have we got any plan s for something like that in the future and I've only got one more question. HON. J.

PLOHMAN : Just very briefly, the cost is tremendous for going underground as compared to aboveground parking and that 's the major deterrent to doing that. Of course if we were building a major building on the grounds, then of course as part of that construction it might be done . But just to go ahead and build an underground parking complex is very expensive. MR. A. KOVNATS: Okay. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Another question from the Member for Niakwa . MR. A.

KOVNATS: Yes, and I do agree with the Minister that it is very expensive but if you 're going to build a facility then you build in your underground parking to go with that facility or even aboveground parking where you might go 2, 3, 4 or 5 floors above ground and then you're building on top . Was th is considered when we built the Law Courts Buildings? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, first of all, insofar as the Kennedy Stree t lot is concerned across here , we wouldn 't be able to go that high because the city by-laws only allow 6 or 8 stories, or whatever it is.

You cannot combine a major parking facility with a major office facility or a hotel or something like that because you just cannot go up to any great height , too many stories . So that won't be a solution for that situation . It probably could best be a parkade as far as the government is concerned , in terms of our needs right at the present time . That is certainly one of the plans we would consider in any development of the major, very prime lot across from the Convention Centre that is owned by the government. If that is ever developed , there would be a complex that would involve perhaps office space .

It could even be a hotel that a private developer would develop and a major parking facility at the same time . As far as the Law Courts is concerned, there was some replacement for parking there but I'm not sure. It was very expensive to put parking under the Law Courts Building because of the limited size but there is some park ing there to replace parking that was on the surface before . The underground under the new Law Courts there 's 87 parking spots . We have a total of 1,147 in the Legislative core area; 700 of those are assigned and 447 are scramble parking . MR. A.

KOVNATS: Might I ask the Minister if there are any plans for the Vaughan Street Home? I don 't 3245

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 imagine that building is really too useful as a working building. Would it be consid ered being taken down and parking facilities being provided there; and possibly even the power house behind that Va ughan Street building - are there any plans to replace that at this time, particularly with parking facilities. I don't want to get into a great amount of detail at this point but I'm talking about parking facilities in that area. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The staff here just about have a heart attack when you talk about cutting out their power house. You need that . . .. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Wel l, I'm not talking about cutting it off, Mr. Minister, I'm talking about replacing it and putting it somewhere else. It's kind of an eyesore. HON. J. PLOHMAN: We just don't have much money for that. MR. A. KOVNATS: I know it takes money but .. .. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairm an, the Va ughan Street Home has been discussed many times. It's a Heritage building. It doesn't look that fancy from the outside but that's what it is. So there is consideration of preserving it and converting it to other uses, but that's still up in the air.

I think the best possibility right now lies right across the street here. MR. A. KOVNATS: The Honour able Minister suggested that the Va ughan Street building doesn't look very nice from the outside right now but might I suggest that it doesn 't look very nice from the inside, either. It's been many, many years since I was on the inside and it was just on a very, very short visit but . . .. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. A. KOVNATS: As a matter of fact I was - you don't want to hear why I was in there, do you? - (I nterjection) - You do? Ail right.

When I was a very young boy we were shooting BB guns behind one of the schools in the city -and I didn't break any windows, I swear, but some of the other fellas that I were with - and that's where we ended up. That was the old Juvenile Court. I remember my morn taking me there and it was a real problem; did I get hell! It's the last time that I shot a BB gun or even thought about brea king win dows in a school - (In terjection) - until recently; no. But I do know and I'm suggesting to the Minister that the inside really isn't very nice either and I would hope that there are some plans.

I'm not saying that you'v e got to rip down that powerhouse. I know that it's got to be an awful lot of money; an awful lot of money. But as things improve I think we've got to try and improve these facilities. I guess that powerhouse has got to be about 70 years old. How long can you keep renovating it and fixing it up? With the situation the way it is and we're improving our other facilities, I would hope that facility would be improved, also. Before I close on that, I don't really want any comment because I know that it's going to take money and that's the an swer.

We were talking one time about some sort of facility along here, along the riverbank where boats could tie up. Has that ever been considered? That's just behind the Louis Riel statue; one of our famous people here in the province. Has there been any talk of developing the facility or the grounds across the way? I know what happens now. We have a lot of people, staff, that go over there and sunbathe, take their sandwiches and I think I wouldn't want to disrupt that kind of an operation. There are other things that happen even in the evening but I wou ldn't want to disr upt that operation either.

Has there been any consideration for tying up boats and using that fa cility for people, visitors, tourists, where they could go on the riverboats and then come and maybe have a tour of the Legislative Building, which I think is certa inly a nice building, and there could be something to encourage tourists to use that facility across the street, see Louis Riel's statue, and maybe even have a tour of the Legislatur e? Have there been any discussion on that, Mr. Minister? HON. J. PLOHMAN: It seems like an interesting proposal that I think the member is suggest ing. MR. A. KOVNATS: I didn't make it up. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Maybe we can have the employ ees of government drive their boats to work instead of cars, then they could park them there and it would save on the parking. I don't think that's what he was meaning. In any event, apparently there's instability in terms of the banks and the City of Winnipeg is responsible for the riverbanks. They are very concerned about any development there because of the instability of the riverbanks at the present time. That doesn't mean it can't happen but it would be quite costly as well. MR. A.

KOVNATS: The Minister brings up a very, very important point when we talk about the instability of the banks. During the last election, the First Minister, who is now still the First Minister because he had made some election promis es that were certainly accepted by some of the people in the Province of Manitoba, we're talking about a $10 0 million cleanup of riverbanks over a 10 -year period, and that's cleaning up. I would think that would have some thing to do with the stabilizing of riverbanks also, which would work down to about $10 million a year.

I know that it comes under the Department of Environment, Workplace Safety and Health because the Minister had told me that. I'm just wa iting to see where some of this money is going to be spent, or was it just an election prom ise? I don't think so; I really don't think so. I think the First Minister really had intention of doing something with the riverbanks, particularly with the sta bilizing of the riverbank just outside of the Legislativ e Building in particu lar.

Are there any plans to use any of that $10 0 million to stabil ize the riverbank at this location and come up with a tourist attraction that I think would be second to none? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I think those plans are being developed insofar as how the money would be spent 3246

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 in terms of a program. That's one of the suggestions the member should make, as well as myself , to the responsibile Ministers when they are developing thos e plans. MR. A. KOVNATS: I don't wish to prolong this situation, Mr. Chairman . I've asked just about as much questions on parking that . . .. You know, I'm not trying to embarrass the Minister. I'm just trying to get some facts and figures and I'm trying to even be of some help to him. I have some questions on greenhouses but maybe there are some other questions on parking facilities, so I'll pass it over to my associates here . MR.

D. ROCAN: Mr. Chairman, we 've had numerous discussions with the Deputy Minister and some of the staff . Just one question right now that comes to mind: Could the Minister tell us what kind of security system we have set up right now at the Lieutenant-Governor's? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I understand , Mr. Chairman, that there is a security system at the Lieutenant-Governor 's residence but that staff is not satisfied with that system and how it is working at the present time . It would be upgraded and tied in with the plans for improvements in the security system here at the Legislative Building . MR. D.

ROCAN: . . . on the parking part of it, like my colleagues have mentioned and most of us have already seen it, where different employees will come , dump off their car here and then walk either across to the Woodsworth Building or whatever . Has anybody given any kind of consideration at all to either a colored pass, a card, a sticker, a decal of any type, issued just to those employees who work strictly here at the Leg .? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The idea has been - I asked those questions as well and I guess it's a question of whether you want to restrict - it's just government employees we're talking about.

The member is aware , I'm sure, that he's talking about government employees who don't work at the Legislative Building but park here. They do have parking privileges, the same as staff here, although some of the staff here have difficulty getting parking spots after they 're all filled up by staff from other locations. It's a question of whether some civil servants should get preference over others in terms of where they can park .

Up to this point, the feeling has been that all government employees should be treated equally with regard to parking facilities and that you should not give preference to those who work at the Legislative Building and say that they 're the only ones who could park here , some kind of an elitist system . MR . G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, I think the suggestion from the Member for Turtle Mountain was not so much only in terms of considering parking for the employees.

It also ties up a great deal of parking for the public who wish access to the building, and visitors who come in from a distance, or come in from a distance for business, Manitobans who come in. They have considerable difficulty, some days, finding room to park . I think that is the basis for the suggestion . While it might in the end discriminate against those who do not work in this building , the aesthetics of the grounds - we've probably taken up as much of the grounds proper as should be taken up with parking now.

So it does come to the point where some limitation on parking is going to have to be imposed , other than the type of fines that are imposed in public parking right now whereby it is cheaper to pay a fine than it is to find alternative parking . I'm sure the department is aware of the problem and I th ink my colleague from Turtle Mountain and I would like to register our concern that the department take some steps in the near future to address that particular problem . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, I appreciate the support of the members with regard to this issue , not that they're supporting the status quo in what we've been doing , but supporting some change in some emphasis and priority in this issue. I feel the same way. I think that by limiting the people who can park here to employees who work here, it would certainly free up the pressure and allow the department to allocate more space for visitors ' parking, which is really what's needed .

Because if you're going to have a beautifu l building like this and it's not really access ible to tourists when they come because they can't find a place to park and they get so frustrated , they leave , or else leave with bad memories because of parking tickets they 've had to pay and harassment about moving their car and so on , that doesn 't speak well for us here. I believe we should attach some urgency to solving it. I don't believe that the solution is really fair in terms of the one being suggested , that it be limited to people who work here .

I think what we have to do is ensure we do that at a time when we have additional park ing facilities built. We then can expand the number of visitors ' park ing and reduce the number of assigned parking spots on the legislative grounds, where they are now , so that there's more room for visitors to park. MR. D. ROCAN: A moment ago, the Minister was saying something to the effect that there are some kind of plans right now for parking. Could the Minister elaborate a little bit more on what is presently tak ing place , feasibility studies or whatever?

Is there anything of this nature that's been undertaken up to now? HON. J. PLOHMAN: As I said, there was a number of stud ies done over the years and they all came back to the fact that if civil servants were paying for parking , first of all - that they were willing to pay probably individually - that if they were paying there would be less demand and therefore more spots for visitor parking and would solve a lot of the problems here. Those studies have not been acted on substantively over the years. The last one was done in 1981.

We are currently discussing that with the joint council to get MGEA concurrence with the concept and it may be a subject of discussion during negotiations as well, I can't say for sure and I wouldn't want to say for sure. The oth er area that we 're looking at is something quite different , and that would be to perhap s - and this hasn't been finalized, so it's only something that is under consideration by my department and myself 3247

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 as one solution - and that would be to have a proposal call for a parking facility across the street. That would involve a private developer building a parkade and charging for parking, offering a certain number of spaces for the government to offset the ones that we would lose that are there now for people who have parking that is provided to them as part of their work, terms of employment. The rest would be open on assignable basis or scramble basis by the developer , who could operate it on a lease pur chase basis with the government, all those spaces. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: I would be quite prepared to give the Minister assurance that we will not go back to parking when you can buy it. We were in the middle of di scussing Physical Plant. I'm sure the Deputy Chairman would like to get these passed in order so they don't scoot back. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Do you want to pass (f)(1) now? MR. G. CUMMINGS: I guess my question was, we have some questions in security that we would be prepared to ask. Do you want them now or ... ? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I have no reason why I would prefer them now. It's just that I didn't want to duplic ate discussions.

As security is separate you can discuss ii later. MR. G CUMMINGS: It was done to accommodate my colleague and I appreciate it. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: (f)( 1 )-pass. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I would like to go back to Security, Mr. Deputy Chairman, if we could. I have a considerable number of questions in that area. If you look at Physical Plant which is where we started when we were still going in order. The question I wanted to lead off with is: How are the renovations proceeding on the Law Courts Building? It's a legitimate question at this point? HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's under Project Services. MR.

G CUMMIMGS: It's not under Physical Plant? HON. J. PL OHM AN: No, that's Construction / Renovations. Then Physical Plant is responsible for opera ting buildings. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I would then be interested to know what greenhouses other than the one over here on the corner of the grounds does the province operate? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Deputy Chairman, there's about six major production greenhouses and one additional small gr eenhouse at the Lieutenant­ Governor's residence.

There's the one here at the Legislative Building; there's one at Fort Osborne Complex; there are four at institutions, Heading ley, Portage La Prairie, Brandon and Selkirk. 3248 MR. G. CUMMINGS: The one at Fort Osborne then would also be to supply plants and materials for government properties, is it? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, Fort Osborne supports the supply that is generated here. There's insufficient capab ility here to do it all. MR. G. CUMMINGS: The ones that are connected with the institutions, does any of the greenery that is produc ed there go anywhere except to be used in the institutional facilities? HON.

J. PLOHMAN: There are, I am advised , a few other buildings that are serviced by these institutions like the provincial building, office building in Portage, Agassiz Centre for Youth, that are supplied by Portage. MR. G. CUMMINGS: In the area of community colleges the maintenance and careta king of those buildings, is that handled directly through Government Services? Are those empl oyees dir ect empl oyees of th e department? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, in most cases they're di rect empl oyees. Keewatin Community Col lege, Mr.

Deputy Chairman, does have some contract, otherwise they're all government empl oyees for Government Services. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Also we see in the notes that provide technical assistance, energy management and consult ative services. In the energy management aspect of this department, is this done in full cooperation with the Department of Energy and Mine s because I und erst ood that the y were involv ed in a energy conservation promotion throughout the province? Are we duplicating services here or is this simply an in­ house program to encourage dif ferent management techniques in our buildings? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: There's no overlap. It's done in consultation with the Department of Energy and is strictly an in-house operation. MR. G. CUMMINGS: It refers to consult ative services. Then the department has people on staff who provide these services or are they contracted in? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I missed that. Could you repeat it? MR. G. CUMMINGS: In supplying of the consult ative services, do you have people on staff who provide this consu ltative service or is it a service that contracted people come in to assist with? HON. J. PLOHMAN: It's mostly , Mr.

Deputy Chairman, the consultative services are provided by the in-hous e staff to building managers of government buildings throughout the system as well as to, in certain cases, to outside, but very little. The Concert Hall, for example, receives some advice and services from the depa rtment as well as the LGD of Churchill in the operation of the complex there. MR. G. CUMMINGS: The question then follows: The people who work in design and would be involv ed in

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 the renovation and design for new buildings , of course, do we have architects on staff who do most of the design and engineering for any new construction, or is that contracted out? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman , the technical advice is provided to our own design services if the building is being designed, if the renovations are being designed by our in-house staff , which we have some capability of or for. It is also provided to professional groups or individuals in architectural firms who are undertaking this work for us on a consultative basis to the department outside consultants .

So we use our own in-house expertise to ensure that their designs are taking in our energy conservation needs as a top priority. MR. G. CUMMINGS: An ongoing concern that I have not only from the point of view of an MLA but previously is as regards on-site supervision and consultation during construction. What tie-ins does your staff have on new construction in this area; for example , on-si te supervision or observation by an architect?

Would that be a staff person or would these contracted firms - would the architectural firm that was involved in the design, an outside firm, if they designed it, would they be responsible for the on-site? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Again , we ' re straying , Mr. Chairman , from a physical plant which is the operation and maintenance of buildings as opposed to the construction of buildings . So the question should be under Design Services , but the fact is that we also have our own inspectors , but it's 4.(

b) actually . That's where it should be discussed . MR. G. CUMMINGS: Okay, I apologize for apparently jumping areas . I looked at the type of personnel who were in this area and I assumed that they would be involved in that aspect as well. The question then flows, however ; caretaking would fall under this department then, does it? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, Mr. Cha irman . MR. G. CUMMINGS: In the last annual report there was a list of the contracts that were let regarding contracting for caretaking .

Has the department set a goal or a direction, or have they changed their direction in any way in the last three to four years regarding private contracting or in-house caretaking for the majority of government buildings , or is the in-house caretaking mainly restricted to the larger complexes and then the smaller ones would be sublet , or is that too much of a generalization? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman , the government in 1982 did move toward more in-house cleaning and away from contract cleaning . That was a decision that was made about four years ago.

It was for major complexes, not for the smaller facilities throughout the province. So it was mostly in Winnipeg and Brandon and a small amount in The Pas, but most of the small facilities around the province are still contracted as opposed to in-house clean ing. But where we have gone to in-h ouse cleaning, we have also introduced some innovations to be more efficient in th at rega rd.

By introducing complete selective cleaning, the department has been able to do, with the same number of civil servants, considerably more space, and has resulted in a saving of some $175 ,000 this year compared to the previous year, and an additional 30,80 0 squar e metres of space being cleaned that previously would have had to hav e additional staff to do it. So there 's some efficiencies in that regard that have been experienced this past year through new selective cleaning methods and it seems to be working very well. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: If I could ask a question or two about the cleaning in this building itself, certainly, it's been very well -maint ained. I guess the one concern , and I'm sure the Min ister's had this expressed to him before, that I would like to express, however, is in regards to the energy saving program where you have gone to daytime cleaning, and becaus e this building is of such a public nature where it serves the entire province and where we have tourists and visitors , it's a little bit distr essi ng that we have as much cleaning going on during the course of the day as we do.

Even after supper which , when we are sitting , of course, is still part of our working day and when we also still have a lot of people coming through the building, we will have polishers at work and things of this nature. Has the department been receiving any concerns in this area or do they even consider that's something that should be considered in the overall management of the building? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased that the member has acknowledged the way the building is looking at the present time.

I think it's probably the best that this building has looked in terms of being kept in many years. We have received fewer complaints as a result. Insofar as the sta ff working during the daytime, the re are very few complaints about that as well. I kind of think it's kind of a good thing for people who come in to see this polishing of th e brass and things lik e that. It lets them know that we really care about our building and that people are reall y taking a lot of care and working at it. I don 't think that's a negative thing for tourists to see, frankly.

Most of the cleaning is done ear ly in the morning , from six to ten , and then there has to be be some people on in the evening . We had a person get sick last year right in the Legislature and made an awful mess in there. The Minister of Education was in the middle of her Estimates and it was one of her staff. I don 't think it had anything to do with the Minister or anyt hing like that. But the fact is it happened at that time, coincidentally, and we didn't have staff on at that time. So now we do have. We have to keep someone here in the evening , but not a large number of staff .

Really, there haven't been any complaints about that and it's been working very well. MR. D. ROCAN: I notice under Remoteness here , it took a great big hike up to $118,000.00. Could the Minister elaborate a little bit more on this one? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Could the member clarify where he is talk ing , what number? 3249

Thursday, 21 Augus t, 1986 MR. D. ROCAN: I believe it would be under Other Expenditu res in your Reference No. 2 here in the supplement book. You've got "Rem oteness, Stat. Hol. and Other" - $11 8,700.00. Last yea r there was noth ing. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, it's composed of minor dollar amounts which are budgeted for, such as weekend premiums, shift work payments, or any of those that are too insignificant to list separately. I might be able to get a longer list of what's included in there, statutory holidays, remote pay.

The "Other" are the ones I was just referring to, as well as the statutory holiday pay and remote. I guess the question is why has it gone from zero to 11 8,000. I'm advised, Mr. Chairman, the reason that it's li sted as a sepa rate line this year in the Supplementary Estimates is because of a request from Finance to break this out in more deta il. MR. D. ROCAN: In the same book, also under Other Ex penditur es , we have Heat, Light and Water - $8,242,800.00. I wonder if the Minister could just break them up in those three different categories. HON. J. PLOHMAN: There's a $1 25,000 reduction there.

I can't break it out into the three areas, but there is a reduction this year due to lower than expected costs in natural gas and anticipated additional access to natural gas in the larger interruptible power plants to supplement. It includes additional electrical costs, sewer and water costs in various urban and rural areas of approximately 5 percent, $443,000, which is more than offset by a general reduction in energy costs perta ining to the Energy Management Program of 465,000.00.

So we come out with a net reduction because of lower than expected costs in natural gas and the combination of the Energy Management Program, a net reduction of 12 5,800.00. I don't have the costs attributable to each of those areas. We could get those if the member was interested. MR. D. ROCAN: In that same list there, we also noticed that Equipment last year was 16 ,600. It took an awful big boost this yea r of $254, 10 0.00. Did we buy a Versatile tractor or what did we buy here? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm advised , Mr.

Chairman, this is due to a di rective from Finance that items that are not consider ed consumable, such as paper goods, lamps, etc., should be coded as building equipment. This was formerly coded as materials. It also includes equipment for new facilities recently placed in our department. MR. D. ROCAN: Al so, we notice here wh ere Government Services - do the y sti ll have the responsibility for the Churchill complex? HON. J. PLOHMAN: We went over that, Mr. Chairman, just a little earlier with the Member for Arthur .

This is for the Member for Brandon East's benefit because he was trying to tell me that it was the Member for Nia kwa that was asking all about it. By the time I ans wer everybody's questions around here, it will be midnight. 3250 The fact is that it's operated by the LGD of Churchill, owned by the Government of Mani toba under MPI, and is subsidized to a maximum of $1 mill ion a year, 90 percent of the costs of operating, by the Department of Government Services. MR. D. ROCAN: Under Transportation - $257 ,OOO - could the Minister elaborate a little bit more on this number of dollars for transport ation? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: There is a $1 5,900 increase on a $250,000 item. The increase is due to additional freight costs, travel costs and slightly increased courier services for the department. With the buildings such as the nursing stations in the North, empl oyee housing units and the Flin Flon office building this past yea r being constructed in the northern areas, or leased in these areas, there's been additional funding for transportation required and budgeted for this year. MR. D. ROCAN: I wonder if the Minister could tell us what is included under Preventive Maintenance? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: There are small projects that do just what they say they do. By getting them done in a timely fashion the same way you would repa ir your leaky window at home or weather stripping around your door or a problem with fl ashing on your roof, or a leak in your roof, you'll prevent more major damage. So it's obviously preventive mai ntenance and it involves minor repa irs under $3,000 - windo ws, roofs, painting - things like that. MR. D. ROCAN: Can the Minister elaborate a little bit mo re on "conc erns and increased au toma ted operations"? Are we talking about security doors, magnetic s cards?

We've go t "m oni toring and surv eillance of building, environmental, safety and security syst ems." Are we talking closed circuit TV's here, or what are we talking here? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I would like to at least see that we pass along and move down to Security and Parking again if that's where the member is moving to. MR. D. ROCAN: Is that where I go? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Wel l, I think the member is taking it in the wrong context. Let's take a look. Sur veill an ce is monitoring of air quality and temperatures and things like that in that context.

It's nothing to do with security in this particular area, Physical Plant. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Well, in the same explanation there, it refers to safety and security systems. Is that the physical security, I presume? Would that include alarm systems? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I understand that the staff in this

section are responsible for - when we break out dealing with safety and security systems, they are maintaining those systems that are in place, the technical security, hardware, that is in place. So

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 that's why it's listed under here under Safety and Security Systems. It's quite different from the monitoring and surveillance of building environmental issues which was a question asked initially. The safety and security systems are the technical systems in place that are being maintained by these people. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Is the department involved at all in any potential ability to centrally monitor the security of buildings? I presume it would fall under this area, in the security of the physical plant itself.

There are programs that are being used in some jurisdictions whereby through alarm systems that are hooked into computerized networks , that monitoring can be done of unsupervised buildings . Is the department involved in any plans or discussions in that area? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I understand that those are some of the areas that we're looking at.

Instead of having security guards or staff there 24 hours a day at some of these buildings, that it's possible to do it in more innovative ways, if one is to have roving mobile staff who check a number of buildings; but also they're looking at electronic systems that can be centrally monitored and will be put in place in a number of buildings probably in the next while . It is just a matter that has begun to be implemented in government buildings in Manitoba and there will be much more of it in the next year or so . MR. G.

CUMMINGS: The Minister says that it has begun or is in the possible - I 'm not sure if he means it has gone past the planning stage. The reason I ask is that buildings can be set up with stand-alone systems that can eventually be hooked into centrally monitored systems . Have we actually got plans or studies that have gone that far or is it simply in the talking stage? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The question was whether this is past the planning stage and is being implemented , and the answer is yes , in a number of buildings we 're in the process of implementation and in others it's still being planned .

We're looking at some plans for this building as one example and tying it in with a number of other buildings as well in this area . MR. G. CUMMINGS: I think maybe the Minister answered my question then . For those that are being equipped now , are they being equipped with equipment that it will be compatible to future linkage on a major system? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: The other thing is, and I'd just take a second on this one , there have been discussions on a provincial level with school divisions on this sort of a system and I wondered if there had ever been any correspondence or information exchanged between that group and the department inasmuch as some of the facilities , i.e., the communication part of it, might be compatible. HON . J. PLOHMAN: I'm advised there has been no formal programming or development that has been in 3251 coordination with the school systems.

There' s been an advisory committee that a member of our staff has been sitting on to advise the school systems on the kinds of systems that we 're putting in place with government, but there 's been no joint program . I'm advised also that they use dial-up system lines for thi s so that there is no need to have a comp licated internal communication system . MR. G.

CUMMINGS: If I could move for a moment into the use of ministerial offices in the building, and I stand to be corrected if my information is not 100 percent correct, but it's my understanding that the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation displaced the Deputy Minister from this building after the recent election.

I'm curious to know if it would not have been more practical considering that the Minister is then responsible for Highw ays, and Government Services, if there could not have been a little more amalgamation between the two departments for the Minister 's own convenience, and the Deputy Minister could have then taken over part of the Government Services Department and things would have been able to have been kept in a more easily handled , closer access for the department.

I ask for information purposes also - and there is anot her rea so n behind it, if the Minister would allow me to expand - and that is there must obviously have been some cost on all this. The next question would be, in moving the Deputy Minister out into other facilities , was that vacant facilities or was that something that had to be renovated to make space? What kind of costs do we precipitate by various movements that I just described? I don't have to have a precise figure; I would like an idea . HON . J.

PLOHMAN: Well, there are a number of questions in there and, of course, the member may not be familiar with the new study that was done and the conceptual plan for this building . Any changes that are being made now are consistent with that plan insofar as the Deputy Ministers' locations would be concerned . The two Deputy Ministers were located temporarily out of this building while renovations are taking place and they are the Deputy Minister for Business Development, and the Deputy Minister of Government Services.

They will be moving back in when the other changes have been made for ministerial suites because there are also Ministers out, Deputy Minister and ministerial suites that will be developed in these areas . It will probably tie in with the whole move of the caucus rooms if that all proceeds , where the Minister of Business Development , and Housing , is going to have to find a new office and will be moving into one of the areas eventually where the areas that are being renovated now were previously occupied by . . .. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste . Rose. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Well, I was just checking on . .. . The Legislative Counsel were housed, and Executive Council had previously located. Insofar as t he Government Services ministerial office , i t 's very small and really isn't of standard for the Deputy Min ister,

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 and the Deputy Minister did go into the old Ombudsman's space , so that was existing space that was there temporarily . Insofar as in this building, it certainly was looked at as a temp ora ry situation insofar as the ministerial offices. I'm not sure what the Premier - I never can read the Premier 's mind in certai n terms of what he's going to do insofar as Ministers are concerned , but it was never thought by myself that was a permanent arrangement that I would have those two departments. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: I realize that this is probably not the forum to spend much time discussing the proposed future use of the building and the overal l plan , but can you indicate for the record what stage that plan is at? You indicated , I believe, at one time that it will soon be clearing the Legislative Co mmittee and then be looking for appro val by both caucuses, is that the route? HON. J. PLOHMAN: In fact , Mr. Chairman , when the Legislative Management Commission approved the study in principle , we have the approval of both caucuses .

We offered to make a presentation directly to the Opposition Caucus and that offer still stands if they would like to see the details of that plan . It was presented to Legislative Management Comm ission and to Treasury Board and Cabinet. The approvals are in principle to the plan and basic requirements of the pla n, but do not represent approval of the dollars associated with doin g the various renovations over a period of perhaps six to ten years for implementation. Those dollars would have to be approved on a yearly basis during the Esti mates process . MR. E. CUMMINGS: One last question then .

The assumption that I make then is that there will continue to be room for both Ministers and Deputy Ministers' offices in the building? HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's a basic requirement, Mr. Chairman, a basis for the plan that Deputies and Ministers will continue to be housed in this building as priority along with MLA 's and support staff for both. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I finished my questions in this area, Mr. Chairman . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Is the committe e ready to pass item 2.(b)? The Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. D. ROCAN: Thank you , Mr. Chairman .

Under Reference 2. in the supplement, there is a note here of con sulta ti ve servic es for the design and renovation of new and existing buildings. We 're consulting who here now? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I think we went over that , that we're dealing with our own design services and advice to consultants or architectural firms who are undertaking new buildings and also for renovations and improv ements to existing buildings . So our staff in this

section would be advising both the design people in­ house as well as those who are contracted with from outside . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 2.(b)-pass; 2.(bX1)-pass; 2.(b)(2)-pass; 2.(b)(3)-pass; 2.(b)(4) - pass. 2.(

c) Worksho p/Reno vati ons - the Member for Ste . Rose . MR. G. CUMMINGS: How m any workshops does the department have? All the wor ks hop s that they would have, are they all with in the City of Winnipeg? HON. J. PLOHMAN: It's located at Whyte and Vine , one workshop in the City of Winnipeg. MR. G. CUMMINGS : And that 's it for the prov ince? HON. J. PLOHMAN: For under this appropriation.

There are small workshops that are in the other areas under Physical Plant , small little workshops in various areas of the province, but not anything that does majo r renovations and millwork, maintenance , paint in g, furniture repairs and so on that's involved here. MR. G. CUMMINGS: In look ing at the sta ff complement here, there is a total of 82 people , or if you wi"h to judge it by the 75 technical people who are invol ved , that would indicate a shop of some considerable size.

They were looking at 1,500 annual requests for service, so I would be inte rested to know a littl e more about the nature of the work. This would almost ind icate that this could be in the area of jobs that could be tend ered and handled through the private industry. What is the advantage of maintaining a shop of this nature if, in fact, my assumption is right that a lot of these jobs would be of a size that could be readily tendered? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Cha irman, this area has been reduced in size over the last numb er of years quite substantially from well over 100 staff down to 82 staff at the present time.

In 1974-75, there were 175 staff in this area and now it's down to 80 , so you can see that there has been much more emphasis placed on contracting out the services that are required , the work that's required, and any major work. What we have left by no means is a small operatio n, you know , 80 staff, but it is still substantially smaller than it used to be and it is involved with mostly small jobs that it would not be as efficient to contract out with , as well as in sensitive areas such as the Legislative Building , renovations for ministerial offices and things like that that happen in here for example.

They're all done by the in-house staff as opposed to contracting out. They do furniture restoration for some of this old furnitur e that can be resto re d , locksmithing, communication s repairs in the buildings. They do the irregular requests such as for ceremonial platforms that are put up on the outside of the building here sometimes for major functions and other small projects that come up from time to time . There's more flexibility by having this kind of operation available and support service available .

I'm also advised that the knowledge of the buildings , from having done work for year s and years in some of the government buildings, is very important in terms of efficiencies. To get an outside contractor, he doesn't 3252

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 have a clue what's in there and therefore it might be much more costly to do than using an experienced in­ house core staff who understand and know those buildings very well. Of course, they can also then supervise the jobs and subcontract out certain aspects of the work which is also done . MR. G. CUMMINGS: That leads into the question that I wanted to ask next where I see that they can act as a general contractor .

This department then , in letting of these contracts and supervising of these contracts , do they, in fact, sometimes supervise sub-trades on­ site as part of the responsibility of this department? Obviously, if that's the conclusion, the 75 technical staff will not be just carpenters . They'll be supervisory personnel in terms of construction . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Most of them are tradespeople . MR. G. CUMMINGS: I guess that's the question. There must be a fair number of highly qualified people there ? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm just , Mr.

Chairman, trying to find out what the breakdown is of highly skilled tradespeople in this area . The majority of them are people who have had many years of on-site experience and , therefore , do a high quality grade of work , but there are also some supervisory staff and we're just trying to determine exactly what that number is. It' s not a large number in comparison to the tradespeople , possibly six or so. There are five supervisory personnel in this area . MR. G. CUMMINGS: The monies that are listed under Workshop/Minor Projects , that is strictly materials ' cost that we see there, is it?

That's on the line in the major book, not in the supplement. Mr. Chairman, I could speed it up a little bit , I suppose . Coupled with that, the Recoverable from Other Appropriations would then be monies paid for the work done for other departments? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I'm waiting on the workshop answer. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The small amount of minor project dollars there is the amount of money that is required to purchase certain materials that are required to do some of the work and is billed back in the next recovery area . MR. D. ROCAN: Mr. Chairman, just a short question to the Minister .

In his supplement , I see he's got telephone and radio systems. Have we got our own private frequency for workshop renovations here or are they tied in with some other radio? HON. J. PLOHMAN: They do the repair of the radios that the depart ment has. There's three frequencies that are involved . As well, they run the paging system that the government has and that our Department of Government Servic es has. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Does the committee wish to pass 2.(c)? The Member for Turtle Mountain . MR. D. ROCAN: Thank you , Mr. Chairman.

The Min ister is telling us, then, this year we have an electronics repair shop here in this department? HON. J. PLOHMAN: It's very small , one skilled person involved in intercoms and repair of radios and things like that. MR. D. ROCAN: Pass (

c) then . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 2.(c)(1)-pass; 2.(c)(2)­ pass ; 2.(c)(3)- pass; 2.(c)(4)- pass. Now we're on to (d), but it is now 10 o'clock . Does the committee wish to recess? HON. J. PLOHMAN: We agr eed, Mr. Chairman , before , that we would attempt to finish tonight if it was done within a reasonable period of time. I don 't know whether that is still attainable . MR. G. CUMMINGS: If we could reach the bottom of 2., or even to the bottom of that page , and pass Security and Parking . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Okay, well, let's finish to the bottom of the pag e then . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 2.(d) - the Member for Ste .

Rose . MR. G. CUMMINGS: I think most of the comments regarding Manitoba Properties were expressed prior to supper time , but , in Leased Properties , has the department presently got a surplus amount of space that we are holding? In other words, what happens to leases that the governmen t has assumed and then would perhaps not have use for the space? Is that figure within reasonable levels right now or does the department have that figure at hand? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, I believe we do. Useable vacant space at the pre sent time is 189,904 square feet.

This vacant space repre sents 2.3 percent of the total government lease d and owned space under the Mani toba Government Serv ices control. Most of it, 140,000 squ are feet, is locat ed in the old Law Courts Build ing and is currently und er renovation . MR. G. CUMMINGS: Just for clarification , the Law Courts Building of course would be one that we own or lease from MPI. I was referring I guess more to space - the figures the Minister gave me then, is that total within the department that's leased and owned that is vacant at this point?

I guess I requested leased , but I'm not only talking MPI , I'm talking private ad that was the clarification that I'm interested in. That' s total leased vacancy , is it? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The tot al leased vaca nt space is 32 ,154 squa re feet. 3253

Thursday , 21 August, 1986 MR. G. CUMMINGS: Okay , so that was the total vacancy. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Thank you. The one other concern in this area is with regard to the expenditur es of leases that are outside of the MPI property. Does the department tender this space or do we pay the average going rate? We had some discussion off the record there about triple net. Is that the basis upon which government leases all space? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, there are some gross leases and mostly triple net leases.

In the case of the gross leases, we just pay one figure and the owner pays all of the other costs associated with leasehold improvements and light and heat and all of the other costs. In the triple net, of course, we just pay a basic price and then any improvements and all the costs of operating are paid for by the government. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: The question I would like to reiterate, I'm not sure when the Member for Turtle Mountain had asked previously about a possible list of facilities that the government owns and leases in the province - we don't need it immediately - but I understand that the Minister agreed to table that with us or supply that information for us. I'm sure it must be on a list readily available? HON. J. PLOHMAN: We would be able to get that information.

Now there's 356 different units that are leased across the pr ovince, in very small little cubbyholes in some little small commu nity, to a much larger facili ty, so that's what we're talking about for a total square footage of 1, 492,835 square feet. MR. G. CUMM INGS: Does th at include the MP I properties? HON. J. PLOHMAN: No, these are the ones, Mr. Chairman, that we lease separate from MP I. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Okay . You may pass (d). MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 2.(d)(1 )-pass; 2.(d)(2)­ pass. 2.(

e) Emplo yee Housing - the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Are we attempting to get out of the busi ness of supplying housing for staff? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we are basically trying to get out wherever we can. We have reduced the num ber from 13 0-some units a couple of yea rs ago, down to 11 2 units at the present time. There's plans within the next couple of yea rs to have further reductions in empl oyee housing units at the institutions where they've been historic that this housing is provided.

But we see that it is rather unne cessa ry, and in our minds at today's markets, there is good housing in most communi ties, that it shouldn't be necessary for the government to provide housing. However in certain remote areas of the province, it may take much longer or maybe never that we can right out of the business because there just isn't any housing available, therefore it is necessary to supply some sort of housing. We have moved over the last four years to more recovery of the actual costs of leasing and renting.

So now we're coming much closer to breaking even on this whole operation than we were years ago, where the rentals that were charged were so low that it was a tremendous benefit to the employee. Now we're trying to go more to market value of the cost that is attributed and charged back to the empl oyee who's benefiting from this housing unit. MR. G. CUMMINGS: The 41 commun ities where we hold these facilities, are they mainly remote other than the institutional ones? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Other than the institutions, they're remote, main ly. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Pass, Mr. Deputy Chairman. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 2.(e)(1) -pass; 2.(e)(2)­ pass; 2.(e)(3)-pass. 2.(

f) Security and Parking -the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: We've dealt with parking. I would ask for some information in the security area. This area, as we have agreed off the record in discussions, can be a del icate area to deal with; but I think nevertheless that we have to have a frank discussion in terms of questions that have been raised and possible solutions to those questions and concerns. In terms of having security, are they handled in blocks, for example, more than one building linked together with radio controls, or are they all on common frequency throughout the city? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: There is a secure frequency that we have. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I guess part of the question that needs to have some questions asked most urgently at this point would be in regard to any stud ies or proposed changes that would occur as a result of those studies regarding security in and around the downtown area here, and certainly in this building. One of the things I would point out to the Minister - and I know that none of these things are going to be news but I think they need to be questioned to some extent - No. 1 would be the scanning of mail and the materials. that come into the building.

They are not all scanned present ly. I'm sure that the staff is aware of what I'm talking about. Are there plans to do anything more in that area in the future? HON. J. PLOHMAN: There are no plans at the present time that I know of that would expand the scanning program that is in place that now scans all ministerial and Premier's mail and others, I bel ieve, from time to time. But there is not a complete scanning of all mail. I'm not sure that there is. That is one of the plans, if the member is suggest ing, it's one of the things that should be done, and any parcels. 3254

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 MR. G. CUMMINGS: Any parcels arriving by mail , I presume? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. It does not include the scanning of courier-delivered parcels. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I guess that would lead us into a related question , Mr. Chairman , and that is in the training of the staff that we have working in Security . As I've said before, and I want it clearly on the record this time as well , I do not have any personal concerns or any disrespect for the people who we have . I ask these questions only to improve what I think is an area that we are somewhat lax in.

I see one way of making a great deal of difference here would be to improve the training of the people involved . I guess an example would be that I'm not sure tha t they are even aware that a signal from a radio can be potentially a hazard if they're situated in a hazardou s area. Those sorts of things are the kind of training I'm talking about. I'm also referr ing to the psychological training or the training in areas of psychology that can be most useful for people in a security position when they are in fac t unarmed .

I think that 's an area that, without an enormous amount · of cost, would probably make a tremendous impact on the ways and means that we secure the Legislative Assembly . HON. J. PLOHMAN: I thank the member for that suggestion. Those are some of the areas that we're looking at, at the present time . MR. G. CUMMINGS: As the Minister is aware and we agreed that this was probably the correct forum for these discussions , there is some divergence of opinion about the amount of staff that is available for security and the distribution of that staff within the building.

Is any consideration being given to beefing up the numbers that I believe are needed to do a job that is becoming increasingly onerous , particularly when we have summer sittings and we have the tourist season and the increased traffic of the public, which starts in early summer, I'm sure? It wouldn't certainly be a high cost item in terms of total security , but I guess something that I find a little distressing is that , when we recently had a large demonstration in the building, that unfortunately we did not have any more than one personnel on staff .

It may have been an accident or an oversight , but I thin k it had potential to cause a great deal of difficulty for everyone involved . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman , the numbers were not accurate in that there was only one. There was one uniformed person, but there was a number of other people who were also here in plain clothes. So that is inaccurate in terms of who was there . I understand that they had asked for additional people , and there were additional peopl e assigned . The membe r can see that there is 10 additional staff years added in t his area , if he looks at the supplementary information .

Those have not all been put in place, but that will serve precisely to beef up some of these numbers . That was our intention when we put these Estimates forward . 3255 MR. G. CUMMINGS : I guess then I apologize for a lack of information . It was not intended to mislead anyone . But I think also, it makes my point in terms of visibility of security. I think it's fairly well established that visibility has an impact in itself .

Particularly , I think I have to express concerns that I have heard and with which, to a large extent, I concur that, while I'm a new member in this Assembly, people with many more years experience than I have expressed concern about the situation that we have found ourselves in vis-a-vis the grounds and the ability of the security staff to patrol those grounds on occasion . Visibility out there, I th ink, makes a tremendous impact on the security of the local citizens or the tourists who might want to mak e use of these grounds, which is what we want them to do and encourage them to do. HON . J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, there is no disagreem ent with tha t, and we have indica ted there are 10 additional staff years in this area . We've also had approved a project that will impro ,· securi ty in this building , as I have advised the individ member privately . I don't want to get into details abL the specifics that are being considered because that part of security as well. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I understand that . HON. J. PLOHMAN: There are a number of majo r steps being taken. They have not reached the final stag e for Treasury Board approval , but they will soon .

There will be some majo r things being under taken in the building to improve security and on the grounds to improve security in terms of lighting and surveillance and so on , electronic improvemen ts as well as staffing improvements . So I thin k the member will see some evidence of tha t in this fiscal year, in the next few months. MR. D. ROCAN: I have a couple short questions to the Minister here. In the supplement , Reference No. 6, I see we've got uniforms. We bought $19,000 worth of uniforms last year. We're buying another $19,000 th· year. Like , are these uniforms only good for one ye HON. J.

PLOHMAN: I believe tha t' s replacemt uniforms. It certainly wouldn 't be for new employees , different sizes and so on. MR. D. ROCAN: How many new employees have we got since last year? HON. J. PLOHMAN: It's not just that you have to have 100 more peopl e working in order to have a demand for those additional uniforms . There 's a turnover of staff within those SY's. Every year there's a substantial number of people who leave and new ones who come . So it's not only reflected in the 10 additional staff in this area, from 97 to 107, but also in the turnover with in that 107. MR. D. ROCAN: Mr.

Chairman , another short question to the Minister . In that same colum n I a lso noticed they've got telephone and radio system s. Have we got another electronic workshop in that depar tment agai n? ve ual out 's is ar? ent

Thu rsday, 21 August, 1986 HON. J. PLOHMAN: In which area? MR. D. ROCAN: Telephone and radio syst ems, same as the one in Workshop/Renovations, and the answer there was there we had a little electronic workshop. I'm asking: Have we got another one here again? HON. J. PLOHMAN: This

section is responsible for, or I should say uses, the electronic systems that are in place. The other that we are talking about installs them and repairs them, maintains them. This is the user section. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Is the committee prepared to pass 2.(f)? 2.(f)(1)- pass; 2.(f)(2)- pass. Comm ittee rise. SUPPLY - NATURAL RESOURCES MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Committee, please come to order. This

section of the Committee of Supply has been consi deri ng the budget Estim ates for the Department of Natural Resources. We are now on Item No. 10.(a)( 1) Survey and Mapping, Admin istration: Salaries; 10 .(a)

(2) Other Expen ditur es - the Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This

section is probably one of the mo st uncon troversial that this Minister is in charge of, so we won't be spending that much time on it. I have a few questions on this department here. This deals basically with Su rveys and Mapping, and I am pleased when I look at the Es tima tes that there is generally an increase in this area. It's an ongoing thing. I think it's a very major undertaking to try and get the sur veying in the province in the right perspective. I'd just like to check with the Minister. Maybe he could explain exactly what is going on at the present time in terms of this

section here, and then I probably will have some questions on that. Maybe he can clarify a little bit where we're at with the general surveys and exactly what is happening, the ongoing program that I think has been in place for a long time. Maybe he can just give us an indication of where we're at with this department. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Natural Resources. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps, before proceeding with my comments in this area, I'd just like to introduce a staff member who has joined us, Dave Crandall, who is the director of this particular branch.

This particular branch, as the Member for Emerson has indicated, perhaps is one that doesn't attract a lot of atten tion, but yet is very, very important in terms of the work that it does and the support services that it provides. The branch is responsible for defining and portraying the location of provincial lands. It provides support services for the different branches of our own department in terms of legal su rveys, suppor t to muni cipaliti es and other jurisdictions. Certainly, when the qu estions of legal descriptions arise, th at is addr essed through the Su rveys Branch.

I think, in terms of my orientation to the department, I was most impressed by the work that was done in terms of mapping, mapping that is done for dif ferent pu rposes and dif ferent means. I think most people would be su rprised of the extent to which mapping is conducted. Certainly , a lot of work is yet to be done, and we may get into some of the discussion in terms of our capital investment in this department to improve its capacity to conduct the mapping. Some are familia r with maps perhaps only to the extent that they would describe the location of the best fishing spots.

People have different interests in maps, and certainly this is the branch that can provide the information, whether it is the most basic of topographical maps or some of the most sophisticated maps that are generated through the landstat system using satel lite technolo gy and computer technology to transform these into maps for, as I said, di fferent purposes, whether we're looking at di fferent types of vegetation. The maps produced are coordina ted with the efforts of the regional services in terms of firefighting, for example.

The maps can be generated in terms of dif ferent fuel materials out on the land; that information can be incorporated. So I would say, Mr. Chairman, that this is a department which is often not rec ognized, and I suppose departments don't want to be recognized for being controversial, but certainly if the departments were to be recognized for giving good support and providing accurate information and providing the base from which many other people are able to do their work, this is the branch of our department that would have to be recognized in that respect. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: I certainly want to agree with the Minister I think it is a very important role that this department plays. I suppose in a country like ours, which is relatively young in terms of history, when we consider the fact that initially we started off with deeds and all kinds of descriptions for properties, that there has been a change. I recall, Mr.

Chairman, when I was Reeve of the R.M. of Han over when certain small comm unities were concerned about their property lines and stuff of that na ture and between joint agreements between government and muni cipaliti es, these things were un dertaken at a cost sometimes to ind ividuals and sometimes to mun icipaliti es, and cer tainl y to government as wel l, but an ongoing process of establishing proper legal descriptions to the survey system.

I had occasion to go through a very complex type of thing in a small little hamlet, where seemingly once a new survey was un dertaken by the municipalit y, it would appear that certain persons owned half of the next neighbour's property. The mental anguish that people went through - I make reference to a place like Sarto, which is not probably one of the most prominent places on the map in Manitoba - but the kind of situation that developed and then when a legal survey was un dertaken it appeared prior to adjustments, that one neighbour owned half of the next neighbour's house and stuff like that.

In some cases, people failing to un derstand what it was all about, the adjus tments were made and everyt hing had cleared up, but it created a lot of problems. 3256

Thursday , 21 August, 19 86 So I think it is a major department I certainly support very much, and that's why I ind icated initially the fact that I was pleased it was one of the few departments within this Minister's jurisdiction that chose an increase, so I'm suppor tive in that respect. I just want to raise some further concerns, Mr.

Chairman, when you consider most rural municip alities are more precise in terms of their mapping, the su rveys have been done, land gets exchanged and what have you ; but what ha s happ ened under the planning program in the province is that land tran sfers do not get approved unless a proper su rvey has taken place. I want to ill ustrate to the Minister some difficulties that arise through that, especially in areas like the LGD's, Local Government Districts. where basically people have an idea where the property lines are.

I've been involved in a lot of these disputes where, from time-to-time, some of the bounda ry lines could be 100 feet out, 200 feet out. Now the difficulty arrives, Mr. Chairman, when an individual is selling a small holding or a smaller holding, even as much as 80 acres, that our planning department now says that unless there is a legal survey taken, they will block the transfer of property.

In some cases what has happ ened is that a sale has taken place of a more minor property and the price might have been $2,000, $3,000 or some thing like that for the proper ty, irregardless of what acreage is involved, then they're required before they can register the property, to have a legal survey done. That is part of our planning regulations and that does not necessarily affect the Minister - I suppose that would be under a municipal jurisdiction - but this depart ment, I believe, is the one that is responsible for the su rvey aspect of it. Now what happens is, Mr.

Chairman, when they get an estimate as to what the su rvey costs are going to be and depending where the closest marker is, and how much rush is concerned -we're not talking of rural municipalities where you have more development and you have your road system in place and stuff like that, and surveys have taken place - I'm talking of a Local Government District where basically , in many cases, there has been no sur veying take place and they might have to run a line from four, five, six , or more miles.

Then when they ask what the cost of a legal su rvey are going to be, then we're looking at costs upwards of double the price of the land. I think everybody is receptive to the fact that these things should have to get established somewhere along the line. I think that is proper. The only thing I'm concerned about is the cost factor, in terms of getting these su rveys done. What bothers me a little bit, how do you explain to an average ind ividual who says, well I'm buying the property for $2,000 or $3,000, and it's going to cost me $6,000 to get the survey done before we can register it.

I would like to see whether there's any way that there could be some liaison developed between the municip al department and the survey people in terms of easing some of these things, whether it's working out a cost-sharing arrangement. I certainly don't think it is fair to the ind ividual who looks at buying a property and then finds out he can't register it because it isn't su rveyed properly and what the cost of a su rvey is. The discrimination comes, Mr. Chairman, if you're close to a property that has been surveyed, the costs are negligible.

Now if it is a property - and this is the last thing that people think of when they buy a property -how close is the last su rvey marker somewhere on the line. It is that which is creating some problems, discrimination, mental anguish and financial cost to people. I'm just wondering if there is some way that we can work out a system whereby people who are located, let's say, in the extreme extense of roads, etc., that they do not have to be penal ized to carry the cost of these kinds of su rveys just because the latest marker happens to be 10 miles away.

I'm just wondering if we can maybe develop some kind of a scenario, because it is a problem. Mind you, it is a problem only with those people in most cases who either want to sell, but what happens is that usually what is involved is, that people who mayb<i lived there for 50 or 60 years, the old ho mestead thing, in some cases it's a deed and they want to transfer it on to their children, or they want to sell it and move closer to a community where they can have all the services available to them, this is the kind of thing that creates a problem. I'm wondering if there is some way we can develop a program.

Like I say, I am very compl imentary of the department here. I think it is a very necessary job that they're doing. I'm just wondering whether we can work out some kind of a thing to ease the financial burden and the problems that are created with the extreme cases. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the problem that is described by the Member for Emerson and indeed I can imagine that there are situations which arise where there will be considerable variation in the su rvey costs from one location to another depending on, as the member said, where the last survey marker might be.

The system that was established for the townships, in a system for su rveys, were established some years ago and it's my understanding that some of the markers were wooden markers and some of those, of course, would no longer be in place. Some markers are lost by way of construction activity or perhaps by way of, in some cases, natural erosion, though I think those would be minimal. But I think it is largely the activity in the landscape which would result in the loss of these. I suppose it may be possible to share the costs. I'm not sure how that would be received by people who are near the markers right now.

You know, if they have a survey their costs are minimal. But if it was poss ible to arrive at a price for a su rvey, take an average figure so that perhaps there wasn't a wide range, I suppose how that would be received by people would depend what their relativ e positions were at this time. But just my initial reaction is that perhaps some consideration should be given to an averaging system of some sort, where the cost of the su rvey would be unif orm and would not vary from one location to anot her. That might be a point to conside r. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, in defence of some of the comments that were made I wonder if the Minister could ind icate, how does a survey system up North take place? It's my understanding that we have trappers who get a certain allocation for cutting lines and I happen to be, as the Minister indica ted before, an individual who 3257

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 loves to go out and hunt and stuff like that. I've been up North and we have the survey lines cut and marked. Can the Minister indicate who pays the cost of undertaking those kinds of surveys? Because having had the occasion to fly in the North from time to time, and I always enjoy that, I see all the survey lines, you know, everything is in line. I'm just wondering. Who pays the cost of those things? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr.

Chairman, I'm not sure if the Member for Emerson was looking for other examples, but just looking at his suggestion of traplines, in those cases there's no need for a legal survey. As such, the traplines are defined by way of natural boundaries; but for other projects there would be the need for legal su rveys to determine exact sites. I suppose in the case of remote communities, mining projects or ind ustrial projects of dif ferent natures, there would be need for surveys and the costs of the surveys, in that case, would be borne by the individual developer . I'm not sure that I've answered the question, though.

MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, obviousl y, my knowledge of the whole matter is limit ed and I was hoping that the Minister could maybe sort of help educa te me in that respect. In my limit ed excursions up North, there are definitely lines which are survey lines whether they're for mining purp oses or not, but I'm sure not all of them are for mining purposes. I'm just asking who is bearing the financial cost of doing the extensive surveying that takes place in the northern part of Manitoba because in many cases, Mr.

Ch airman, I'm sur e tha t not a Na tive community or a mining development or anybody is really concerned about the surveys that have to take place there. They're very extensive and I commend it - I'm not criticizing it - I'm just asking who's paying the cost for all these. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, the member is correct. The lines that he refers to are the base lines and not all of the province is covered, but a good portion of the North is covered by those base lines and those base lines were in place at the cost of the branch. Not a lot of that is being done anymore.

They are using some of the new techn ology to de termine locations. Some of the satellite technology can be employed so that there is not need to extend the cutting of the base lines. But that grid was imposed and it was from that basic grid that individual developers or ind ividual surveyors wanting to establish another site would have to work. Those would be the reference points, but that is not being extended because of the ability to apply some of the new technolo gy to surveying. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, which basically lends cause to my plea, I suppose that initial ly, and I unde rstand the fact that it was necessary because as you go through the North you have long areas where there's nothing, but these lines were established to some degree at cost to the government. What I'm saying is that principle, and I'm not critical of it, all I'm asking is whether that kind of a principle can be applied to some of our Local Government Districts, whose case 3258 is almost the same.

Now, we're looking at more densely populated area in most LGD's but when you take the discrepancy between the cost of the ones where surveys have been done and the ones they have not and you have a transaction taking place that's of a major natur e and, actually , Mr. Chairman, that has stopped some sales because virtually the cost of the surveys have been exorbitant and cannot be borne by the individuals. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I'm advised by staff that when there are priority items from the municipalities and if we have resources avai lable, we do assist them.

If they have some staff resources that they can dedica te to this, there is a shared effort in this respect. So there are some instances in which we do respond and assist municipalities. I suppose a person could look to resurvey all of Southern Manitoba but there are some fairly sign ificant costs. I think earlier I saw the figure of some $40 million to survey the southern part of agricultural Manitoba. If it was resurveyed, there is a fairly significant cost attached to it.

I'm not sure that is where our priority should be at this time, to resu rvey, given some of the need to survey areas that have not in the North been surveyed to that extent. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, I used the North only as an example. The Mini ster is referring to mun icipalities. In most cases, municipalities have pretty well not a bad system in place. It is basically the Local Government Districts where some of the more costly problems develop.

All I wanted to do is raise with the Minister some of the problems that develop through this and ask whether there is some way - I'm not expecting this Minister to spend $40 million on doing the exact surveying. I think the fact there are additional monies expended in this department already gives me confidence that it's moving in that direction. I fully appreciate that it cannot all be done at one time. I'm just asking because we have some - and they're limit ed - unique cases where the costs are too high.

I would ask that maybe some kind of arrangement could be worked out between the survey department here and the Department of Mun icipal Affairs and the Planning Branch, who are basically responsible for not allowing registration of transfer of properties without a legal su rvey. That is the only issue that I basically want to raise in this section, to see whether there's some common sense.

I'm not asking for a definite policy on this, but surely the Minister will become aware of some of the problems that develop here and ask whether there's some kind of a cost-share program can be worked out so that people who buy a property an d, as I indicated before, who are miles from a legal survey point, that they do not have to pay more for the survey than they do for the property itself. You know, I think it begs a little bit of common sense and I'm sure that, with the work that the department has been doing, we can expect that kind of a . HON. L.

HARAPIAK: Certainly , if there are some suggestions that people from the municipal level or people involved with local government dis tricts want

Thu rsday, 21 August, 1986 to bring to our attention some ideas for cost-sharing or, say, averaging of costs, we would be prepared to enter into discussions on that. But somehow, as the member has indicated, there is a cost attached to this, and the cost has to be covered off with just a matter of doing it most equitabl y. With respect to the requirement for a su rvey for land tran sfer, that is not a requirement that this branch puts in place, but it is a requirement of the Land Titles Office, which is under the Attorney-General's jurisdiction.

That was a requirement from that point Also, in case of some of the - we were talking about commun ities in the North. Even where there is not a land ownership ques tion, but for some of the lodges for remote development before lending institutions become involved, they will want a precise description of the location. So there are costs involv ed for the developer there . . . . MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Chairman, that begs the question, for example, of a lodge or if some individual wants to establish a lodge in the northern portion of the province somewhere along the line, is he charged with the total survey costs of bringing in a line for maybe 50 or 10 0 miles, because I think, if that is the case, we have lines drawn. Certain lines have already been surveyed and drawn at a cost to the government. How are we apportioning the costs for lodge owners who, for borrowing pu rposes or legal purposes, need to have a legal survey done? Are all those costs charged against the individual? HON. L.

HARAPIAK: I just asked for an example of what costs might be with something of that sort, and he said the survey crew at about $700-a-day and, depending on the location, if it was required for, say, three, four, five days, just mul tiply it times $700.00. So it can quite cost ly, but not all of the costs associated with that would have to be borne in the sense of running the base lines. There's a responsibiity with this branch to establish the benchmarks, if you like. Then moving from that benchm ark to the on-site su rveys, the responsibilit y of that would be with the individual developer . MR. A.

DRIEDGER: Now, I appreciate that comment. The Minister has ind icated that the government basically accepts th e respo nsibili ty for se tting certain benchmarks. For those benchmarks, any extension from there would be the cost of the individual, if you required a legal su rvey. That, Mr. Chairman, is all I'm asking basically . Now, I hate to belabour this, because I've already spent more time than I anticipated on this

section here, but what are the benchmarks? For example, are road allo wances benchmarks that should be established by this department, and then the individual carries the other costs? How do we es tablish what are benchmarks? HON. L. HARAPIAK: As the member indicated, and he's aware and most members would be aware that, in the southern part of the province, we have a network of section, township and ranges to identify the land. We've indicated that in other parts of the North there are the base lines that are in place. But for the remote locations, there is not an insistence that they have that in place.

They can do a survey to determine locations, but we do not insist on sort of undue restrictions and place undue costs on the individual. One point further that I would like to bring to people's atte ntion, I think the member may be famil iar, having worked at the municipal level, with some efforts on our part to educate the general public with respect to the importance of the survey markers. We make information avai lable, asking people to observe those, and noting on there that there is a cost associated with the replacement and that it is a cost through your taxes.

There's a notation on here: "The cost to replace a single su rvey monument may exceed $500 and, for an entire township, $50,000.00." So there is an attempt on our part to make people conscious of the need to respect tho se su rvey monuments. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, I don't intend to pursue this any furt her. I just wanted to ill ustrate some of the concerns that develop from time to time.

I'm hoping that the Minister and his staff, when these situations arise, that there could be some common­ sense appr oach being used so that ind ividuals, not by their choice, don't have to end up facing a financial hardship not of their own choosing, because government passes the regulations indicating that you can't register un less it's su rveyed in a certain area, etc. In some cases, it is unreasonable to expect an individual to pay the cost when these things are not of his own making.

So I'm just appealing to the Minister and his staff to use some common sense in that direction because, if I have cases again where this happens, I'd certainly want to feel that I could come forward and maybe ask for consideration in that di rection. Thank you. Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: Items 10 .(a)(1) to 10 .(f)(2) were each read and passed . Resolution No. 12 8: Resolved that there be granted to Her Ma jesty a sum not exceeding $3,065,500 for Natural Resources, Su rveys and Mapping, for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 19 87-p ass.

Item No. 11 .(a)( 1) Resou rce Su pport Programs, Manitoba Water Commission: Salaries; 11 .(a)

(2) Other Expenditur es - the Honourable Minister. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, perhaps before we get into the Resource Support Programs, I just want to indicate to the members opposite we have some materials related to the use of the new technology in su rveying, a newsletter on the using of remote sensing in Manitoba, and we have sample maps that have been generated by some of the new equipment we have. So we would like to make those available as examples of the kinds of work that are produced by the department. Mr. Chairman, there is not a great deal I want to say as background information on

Section 11, Resource Support Programs. The branch deals with the support services again. We have the Ma nitoba Water Commission and as members will note , we have the Garrison Diversion unit scaled down somewhat. Again, the Conservation Districts Authority which supports the 3259

Thursday, 21 August, 1986 efforts of the conservation district and another area that we did touch on somewhat this afternoon, the Hab itat Enhancement Fund, which is the funding for the Habitat Heritage Board. So we'd be pleased to ans wer any questions in this area. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Minis ter, for the record, can maybe ind icate the role of the Manitoba Water Commission in terms of the role that they play, the involvement with water coming in, for example, on the Saskatchewan River, controlling water levels.

Could he maybe outline so my colleagues and myself have a better understanding of the role that they play. It is my underst anding, and the Minister can correct me if I'm wrong, that Manitoba Water Commission members are appointed by government. Maybe he could specify some background information for the whole project and the people who serve on that board. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chai rman , th e Water Commi ssion does deal with a variety of projects.

Whene ver a project which would affect a body of water is being considered, it can be referred to the Water Commission for its assessment and would provide advice to the Minister on how the particular project might impact the various interest groups and the environment. This is to ensure that the maximum benefits are achieved from the use, allocation, and the conservation of water. There are, as well, other bodies which deal with water flow, for example, which goes from one province to anoth er.

We recently had some discussion on the Souris River, where we have water flowing from Saskatchewan into the northern states, and then back into Canada. There is a body set up to monitor those kinds of concerns as well. But basically this body , the Manitoba Water Commission, would look at any major project within the province which would have an impact on water use, water qual ity, and advise the Minister on that. The chairman of the Manitoba Water Commission is Mr. Doug Duncan.

The secretary - I believe that's the correct title, secretary or secretary-treasurer - secretary to the Water Commission is Florence Matthews. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Would the Manitoba Water Commission have any authority over the levels of the lakes, Lake Winnipeg, Lake Manitoba in terms of inflow, outflow? Would this be part of their responsibility? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, the Water Commis sion is an arm's length body which does provide advice to the Minister with respect to setting levels, Lake Manitoba, as an example, and we had some discu ssion on that.

The range of levels would be assessed; recommendations would be made to the Minister. In fact, as I ind icated the other night, the Manitoba Water Commission is nearing the completion of an assessment on Lake Manitoba. Again, the report should be submitted to me shor tly. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Minister could indicate - the mem bers on the Manitoba Water Commission - what qualifications or expertise do the memb ers of the board ha ve in terms of establishing what the level should be and the kind of damage that it does?

Are these specially qualified people on the commission or is it just sort of a political appointment and they respond to it as the Minister maybe wants? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, the appointments to the Water Commission a